On May 7, 2006, at 6:07 AM, Robin Haswell wrote:
> > >> Using comments to wrap something that you want to keep in the >> document >> is a bad idea. Sure, it might happen to work with Kid, but I still >> wouldn't do it or recommend it. > > That technique has been recommended for JS since day 1. It's the > standard way of hiding JS from > non-javascript-aware browser. You wrap it in a comment so if your > user agent doesn't understand JS, > it doesn't go printing it everywhere. It's not standard practice for XML. Standard practice for XML is to use CDATA. Comments in XML are comments and shouldn't carry anything meaningful and shouldn't really be expected to survive some kind of document transform. Either way, I highly doubt any browsers (or other HTML parsing software) still exist that have a problem ignoring <script> tags -- they've been with us for *over ten years*. Day 1 was a hell of a long time ago. -bob --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
