Closed
Bug 49598
Opened 25 years ago
Closed 25 years ago
stuff inside noscript displayed: strict dtd -> table -> font -> noscript
Categories
(Core :: Layout, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
VERIFIED
INVALID
People
(Reporter: jruderman, Assigned: clayton)
References
()
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
|
284 bytes,
text/html
|
Details |
splitting from bug 49160
|
Reporter | |
Comment 1•25 years ago
|
||
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 2•25 years ago
|
||
why does the entire page show up blank if the <table> code is left out?
|
||
Comment 3•25 years ago
|
||
It does because in strict, <body> can only contain block level content (<p>,
<div>, <table>, lists, etc.). Without the <table>, your content is/starts with
inline (text, <span>, <img> etc). Instead of a table you could use a <div>
</div> combo to wrap that text and <noscript>...
Next up, <noscript> only takes block content, so you should really wrap its
contents inside a <p> or <div> too. <p> only takes inline, <div> takes flow
which is inline & block (and which is why you'd need to wrap that stuff in a div
and not a p). <font>, which isn't a valid tag anymore in the strict dtd (but
apparantly still kinda processed by the strict parser) only takes inline.
So when you have: <div>some text <font color="green"><noscript><p>more text
</p></noscript></font>last text</div>, the font gets processed (compatibility?)
and consumes the <noscript>, because that is a block level tag, meaning its
contents are just put directly inside the <font> tag and you get the green text.
The HTML is invalid in a couple of ways and behaviour for it is undefined
(though predictable) when the strict parser is used. Marking this bug invalid.
Btw, when Rick Gessner returns he'll make it so that use of the strict parser
becomes a user pref, defaulting to off. Also, this Monday a meeting will be held
related to the strict parser.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 25 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
|
|
Reporter | |
Comment 4•25 years ago
|
||
peter, thanks for the detailed explanation of why this bug is bogus.
(bug 6211 would have been helpful here, because mozilla could have told me
exactly what it was thinking: "warning: inline content in body ignored
[reference]", "warning: noscript tag ignored because... [reference]")
|
|
Reporter | |
Updated•25 years ago
|
Reasoning sounds good to me. Aside from that, bug #52568 seems to have been
fixed by accuweather when I checked it today.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
SPAM. HTML Element component deprecated, changing component to Layout. See bug
88132 for details.
Component: HTML Element → Layout
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•