Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: New legal tags

Author:Chuck Shotton
Posted:3/5/1999; 7:05:49 AM
Topic:New legal tags
Msg #:3622 (In response to 3618)
Prev/Next:3621 / 3623

If it were normalised we'd be a step closer to sanely being able to have HTML fragments embedded in XML-RPC without having to use <

This is a problem we've wrestled with in Gossip over the past few months. Our decision was to just shove all HTML into a base64 encoded field and leave it alone. Most HTML on the net is hand-written and ratty and it's just too hard to fix it up on the fly.

But this brings up another point that I asked about a few weeks ago. I'll use the XML version of Scripting News as an example. Occasionally, the text contained in the XML will contain italic tags, or other stylistic mark-up. "string" is a semantically poor tag as far as giving the XML parser a clue about what to do with the contents. As it stands now, the HTML tags *are* treated as plain text with most parsers. But how does the receiving application know whether or not to do anything with those HTML tags? Should they be there at all?

I guess a shorter version of this question is "are there any standards for dealing with HTML embedded in XML?"

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:48:24 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.