HTML Tag Cleaner Fails

[Bill Marriott]

Except that <title> has a defined, special meaning that Rev knows about --  
which is to specify the title of a document -- and that is by definition 
distinct from the content. The <foo> tag however, is undefined.

I believe that it's appropriate to "strip" out the information between title 
tags and to preserve the information between "foo" tags.

By reference, see:

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/HTMLandSGML.html

"The behavior of WWW applications reading HTML documents and discovering tag 
or attribute names which they do not understand should be to behave as 
though, in the case of a tag, the whole tag had not been there but its 
content had, or in the case of an attribute, that the attribute had not been 
present."

In this case, Rev "understands" the title tag, and correctly does not 
include it in the content. It does not understand the "foo" tag and 
therefore renders it as if the tag were not there.


Dar Scott wrote:
> On Aug 7, 2006, at 2:27 AM, Mark Schonewille wrote:
>
>> No, it is what I expect. My internet browser behaves exactly the same.
>
> Actually, Dan is right.  It is bizarre!
>
> My word processor doesn't do it.  My calculator doesn't do it.  The  IP 
> address field in preferences doesn't do it.
>
> A Revolution field is not a browser and it is not even an HTML  displayer. 
> It has a simple html-like markup view that covers the  capabilities of of 
> the field.  Though it is similar to HTML, htmlText  doesn't even attempt 
> to be like HTML even in little things like  representing whitespace.
>
> The title is way outside the scope of what htmlText does.
>
> Stripping <title> and not <foo> is bizarre.
>
> It might be a clue that htmlText will become closer to HTML, but I 
> suspect it is an ancient artifact.