Hi,
From: Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
However, there may be a 5th option available. Consider this, using the
following markup samples from the article.
1.
<em><p>X</em>Y</p>
BODY
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: X
+ #text: Y
Why would you drop the first EM? Why should this be parsed any different
than 4? I think it should look like this instead:
BODY
+ EM
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: X
+ #text: Y
2.
<em><p>XY</p></em>
BODY
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: X
+ #text: Y
Again, I think that there should be an empty EM before the P. Why are there
two text nodes?
BODY
+ EM
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: XY
3.
<em><p>X</p><p>Y</p></em>
BODY
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: X
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: Y
BODY
+ EM
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: X
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: Y
4.
<em>X<p>Y</em>Z</p>
BODY
+ EM
+ #text: X
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: Y
+ #text: Z
Agree.
I don't think there's much advantage of differentiating between
"well-formed" and "malformed" markup. They should be parsed the same to keep
things simple and predictable. Thus, <em><p>XY</p></em> should be parsed as:
BODY
+ EM
+ P
+ EM
+ #text: XY
...IMHO.
Regards,
Simon Pieters
