Daniel W. Connolly writes:
> In message <[log in to unmask]>, Mike Meyer writes:
> >The Nov 15 DTD allows <input>, <select> & <textarea> in <option> &
> ><select> via an inclusion on <form>. This differers from the original
> >spec, and using it causes most browsers to do wierd things.
> >Is this a "quiet change" that browser implementors need to be made
> >aware of, or is it a bug in the DTD, and <select> should have an
> >exclusion on it?
> Looks like a bug in the DTD. I guess <input> inside <textarea> is
> nonsense that's allowed by the current DTD too.
> Good catch.
> I have to admit I'm not very familiar with forms, their usage, and
> implementation. Could somebody out there hack around with adding exlusion
> exceptions to the DTD until they're satisfied that it reflects reality? I
> recommend Earl Hood's dtd2html as a way to visualize the results.
Here is a quick rundown of what I've got on my system, with the following
<option> Foo <input type=text name=y>
1. Mosaic/X correctly ignores the <input> tag
2. Netscape/X gets the option correctly, but has an unselectable text input
area as well.
3. Netscape/Win has the same behaviour as Netscape/X, but the two widgets
are overlaid directly on top of each other.
4. WinWeb - Has a very weird behavior. 'Bar' is in a dropdown list by
itself, followed by 'Foo' as normal text, then a text entry area.
5. Internetworks - works correctly
6. Lynx 2.3 - can only select the text entry area.
7. Emacs-w3 - show both, but they overlap
8. AIR Mosaic - Dropdown is empty, and shows the text entry area also.
9. WinMosaic - probably the same as AIR Mosaic, but I don't have it on my
> I'll integrate the results and do my usual release testing.
> Failing that, I could do some more research (read: pore over the Mosaic
> source) and hack up the DTD myself.
From the examples above, if there is some way to allow _only_ non markup
in an <option>, I think that would be best, and reflect currently broken