> On Jan 4, 2018, at 11:47 AM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, txexpr is essentially just `xexpr->string` but it sees when you
> put in a `script` or `style` and it puts the `make-cdata` for you. (It
> also does a bit more checking to make sure the xexpr is well-formed.)

For anyone curious why — the HTML spec calls for `script` and `style` blocks to 
be treated as if they were CDATA but without actually requiring a CDATA 
wrapper. [1] So `xexpr->html` handles that housekeeping. `xexpr->string` 
doesn't (because it has XML, not HTML, in mind). See also: [2]

If we were to dig down further there are probably certain tags that should be 
closed one way in XML and a different way in HTML but ... I've served zillions 
of HTML pages made with `xexpr->html`. No one has complained (I mean, about the 
level of spec compliance).

On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Matt Jadud <m...@jadud.com 
<mailto:m...@jadud.com>> wrote:

> What is the best way to generate HTML from the webserver? I don't care about 
> XML vs. HTML; I just want the fastest path to writing a small web application 
> that solves a problem that I have,

FWIW I've found that keeping the HTML template static, and populating it with 
data from AJAX requests back to the Racket web server, can help keep things 

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#h-6.2 

[2] https://groups.google.com/d/topic/racket-users/g0NuR5KLH7k/discussion

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to