Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Arjun Ray wrote:
> Yes, we (qua DTD designers) know this. To guard against *inadvertent*
> error - which was my point - the user would have to be given a different
> explanation or rule of thumb ("Always provide title text, don't leave that
> part blank!") If they internalize this, very good.
If the start and end tags were required, would you likewise tell them
"don't just put in <title></title>"?
Markup people don't flip back and forth between the DTD and the instance
- they take their cues from the hardcopy (or whatever) and then from
experience. They may not know that a title element will eventually be
wrapped around the text that immediately follows the start tag for
section, and why should they? Markup is about providing sufficient
structural definition, it's not about labelling things.
> I've found "Always start text with a tag that describes it" much easier to
> teach. Diff'rent strokes fer diff'rent folks...
Agreed, but will you require them to continue to insert the tag long
after they understand the structure? If, after they had marked up, say,
a couple of thousand sections each you told them "from now on, if you
don't want to put in the start tag for a title, then don't" how many do
you think would keep doing it? Not many, would be my guess.
> Sorry, I don't understand this. Who said anything about *wanting* to
> create invalid data?
Sections begin with a required title. Whether the start tag of the title
is omissable or not doesn't change that in any way. The fact that a user
might create invalid data by leaving out the title element has nothing
whatsoever to do with omissability.
--
Regards,
Marcus Carr email: mcarr@a...
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia) www: http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
- Einstein
|
