On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, pAb-032871 wrote:
> This thread's been down for a while, but there's something I meant
> to add:
>
> In "Re: lynx-dev A Missing >..."
> [19/Jul/2000 Wed 15:14:21]
> Thomas Dickey wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 19, 2000 at 02:45:10PM -0500, Klaus Weide wrote:
> > > If the '>' is completely missing from the '</SCRIPT>' tag, some stuff
> > > after the defective tag will just be junked - until the next '>';
> > > this isn't different from missing '>' in other situations.
>
> If someone forgets to put a ">" after their tag, it'll screw ay
> browser up, and they're likely to fix it as soon as they find
> out about it.
I'd like to agree, but I tested the page in question with Netscape and
w3m, and they both rendered it. (It's a recent change to w3m, since
the first copy I tried, from January didn't handle the page at all)
> > > I don't think this is the best way. It may also prematurely end the
> > > SCRIPT contents on '</SOMETHING' that isn't '</SCRIPT', and while that's
> > > not valid input (any '</SOMETHING' in the script content should have been
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > written with some form of escaping), it is probably more useful to continue
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Not neccesarily. See below.
>
> > > looking for a '</SCRIPT' in that case.
> >
> > shouldn't the tag end when it sees a new "<", unless it's quoted?
>
> This would cause some problems if there was some kind of
> if(whatever){
> document.write("<B>bold text</B>")
> }
> content in the script itself. . . Unless this is what you meant
> by "quoted".
no. I meant something like
<tag value="<something">
--
T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://dickey.his.com
ftp://dickey.his.com
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
