Damon Courtney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm thinking about redoing the parser to take into account
> > situations like this:
> > ----
> > <some html>
> > <?
> > puts {<? blah blah blah?>}
> > ?>
> > ----
> > Which currently cause problems with the parser. Thoughts? Maybe at
> > the same time, I can make it accept <?dtcl as well as <?, also...
> Hrmmm... Couldn't we just check to see if we're already in a
> block of code? I like the idea of specifying some kind of specific
> rivet tag, but I think doing <?rivet is a bad idea. I mean, I guess
> it works.
The reason that it came up was that someone asked me about doing XML
documents, which start with <?...?>. I can see how it would be a pain
in the neck to have to escape that:
puts "<? .....\?\>"
> NWS had its own tag which looked more like a real HTML
> tag. They were just:
> <nws>
<? is compliant XML, but adding random tags is not. If you use an
HTML editing mode like psgml in emacs, which keeps track of context
and what tags can be inserted, adding spurious markup is bad.
> BTW, I'm back from honeymoon, recovered from the wedding and now
> recovering from Christmas, which means I'll be back on some code
> very shortly.
Cool:-)
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Free Software: http://people.debian.org/~davidw/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
Personal: http://www.efn.org/~davidw/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
