Subject: RE: JavaScript From: "Hunter, David" <dhunter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 13:31:59 -0500 |
From: David Carlisle [mailto:davidc@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 9:37 PM > > True enough. But I believe the original question had a web browser > > as the destination application, not another XML parser. > > 'tis dangerous to rely on bugs, someone (even browser authors) may fix > them one day. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm used to it by now, but I was under the impression that this wasn't a bug, but the intended behaviour of scripting-aware browsers? That is, when the good folk who designed HTML decided to create a <script> element, they purposely decided that the <script> element could include HTML comments, to protect the non-scripting-aware browsers. (Of course, even if this is right, the question remains how this will get treated with XHTML. Why don't I go and see if the spec says anything on this subject...) David Hunter david.hunter@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.MobileQ.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: JavaScript, David Carlisle | Thread | RE: JavaScript, Duane Nickull |
RE: JavaScript, Kay Michael | Date | Re: JavaScript, David Carlisle |
Month |