From: TOM (ptittom@free.fr)
Date: Tue Oct 24 2000 - 07:45:20 EDT
On 24/10/2000 10:31:59 Daniel Veillard wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 06:29:25PM +0200, TOM wrote:
> > No, since <option> isn't an empty element but an element whose
> > closing tag is ignorable.
> > Doing this (considere <option> an empty element) you break up
> > parsing when you have the closing tag : <option>My
> > option</option>
>
> Hum, I disagree, take the example of p
> it's in the same class and the way it's fixed is the same:
> add p in the list of the tags autoclosing itself
> "p", "p", "head", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6", NULL,
> and same is applied to option
> "option", "option", NULL,
> Marc suggestion seems the adequate way to handle this. There may
> be more element which can close option, in that case they should
> be added.
Oh sorry, I misunderstood the role of these lists...
I'll check twice next time before answer foolish things ;o)
---- Message from the list xml@rpmfind.net Archived at : http://xmlsoft.org/messages/ to unsubscribe: echo "unsubscribe xml" | mail majordomo@rpmfind.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 24 2000 - 13:43:37 EDT