Date: 15 Oct 1999 03:21:03 -0700 From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) To: <jkoshy@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: #anchors in .html handbook Message-ID: <vqczoxkx6uo.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <jkoshy@FreeBSD.org>'s message of "Fri, 15 Oct 1999 03:00:20 -0700 (PDT)" References: <199910151000.DAA20233@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From: <jkoshy@FreeBSD.org> Thanks for the explanation.... * From what I understand from reading the rather dense SGML standard, * this means that NAMEs, NAME TOKENs etc are to be mapped to upper-case, * but entity names aren't to be. An anchor target is a NAME (an ID * to be precise). Eek. So it was the previous behavior that was wrong? (And may I (hypothetically) bang the head of the person who wrote that part of the standard to a really hard wall? Many times? HELLO?!?) * Now, the HTML 3.2 spec claims that using <a name="XXX"> and <a name="xxx"> * in the same document is illegal, so one assumes that anchor ids should * be treated as case insensitive. However it also says that the behaviour * of user agents when fragment names and anchor names are not case-exact * is undefined. * Yes, Netscape and Lynx don't seem to work correctly if anchor and * fragment names don't match exactly. However, links within the handbook I'm not sure if I follow you here, the standard says user agents are not required to do anything special for non-case-matching names, so Netscape (the one I tried) is perfectly following the standard. But maybe you mean "correctly" in terms of in real life, like getting work done, as opposed to stiff-necked standards. This really sucks. I'm glad I didn't go into the field of documentation. :< Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?vqczoxkx6uo.fsf>