Re^2: _new considered harmful


No such thing as a small change
	PerlMonks

by ikegami (Patriarch)

on Oct 02, 2006 at 20:51 UTC ( [id://575953]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

Update: Oh! I think you meant "_new is certainly harmful", instead of "_blank is certainly harmful". Ignore the rest of this post if so.

Why do you say it's not valid XHTML? According to the XHTML DTD, the value of target is a NMTOKEN. _blank is a valid NMTOKEN.

Nmtoken  ::= (NameChar)+
NameChar ::= Letter | Digit | '.' | '-' | '_' | ':' | CombiningChar | 
+Extender
[download]

Futhermore, it's not list as a difference with HTML 4, and HTML 4 explicitely lists _blank as a valid frame target name. (_new, on the other hand, is not listed.)

Comment on Re^2: _new considered harmful Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: _new considered harmful by wazoox (Prior) on Oct 03, 2006 at 13:37 UTC
Check with the w3c validator : any xhtml page containing `<a href="foo" target="_blank">` [download] will be dubbed as non valid XHTML strict. Well, actually that's the "target" attribute that's invalid, not "_blank".	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: _new considered harmful by ikegami (Patriarch) on Oct 03, 2006 at 15:10 UTC
It's defined in the Frameset DTD. Frames are valid XHTML, but they have in a seperate DTD since they have affect presentation.	[reply]
Re^5: _new considered harmful by wazoox (Prior) on Oct 03, 2006 at 19:52 UTC
Interesting. How do you define a frameset that will pass the w3c validator?	[reply]
Re^6: _new considered harmful by ikegami (Patriarch) on Oct 03, 2006 at 20:01 UTC

Domain Nodelet^?

Node Status^?

node history
Node Type: note [id://575953]
help

Chatterbox^?

How do I use this? • Last hour • Other CB clients

Other Users^?

Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (7)

As of 2024-04-19 09:31 GMT

Sections^?

Information^?

Find Nodes^?

Leftovers^?

Voting Booth^?

No recent polls found