[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
John Cowan wrote:
> 1) What is the correct jargon for an element which allows both start-tag and
> end-tag omission? I have been calling them "phantom elements", since they
> may be ESIS-present but lexically absent.
I don't recall hearing a name for this; "phantom element"
sounds as good a name as any. (I will note though, that
in my opinion start-tag omission is a Really Bad Idea).
> 2) I note that when SP has a choice between inferring a missing end-tag and
> inferring a missing start-tag [...]
This can never happen: it will only infer start-tags
for contextually required elements, and if there is
a contextually required element it cannot infer an end-tag.
> (and phantom element), it infers the end-tag:
>
> <!DOCTYPE root [
> <!ELEMENT root - - (foo, foo?)>
> <!ELEMENT foo - O (#PCDATA | bar)*>
> <!ELEMENT bar O O (foo)>
> ]>
> <root> <foo> case 1 <foo> case 2 </root>
>
> does not generate an ESIS containing "bar", and even adding a "</bar>"
> before "</root>" does not help. Is this behavior prescribed by the
> Standard?
Yes, this is the prescribed behaviour. 'bar' is not
contextually required at any point in 'foo's content model,
so it is not subject to start-tag inference.
--Joe English
jenglish@flightlab.com
|
