Re: Bug in TR 19, and fancy HTML in TR's

From: Katsuhiko Momoi (
Date: Sat Jul 08 2000 - 16:35:42 EDT

Doug Ewell wrote:
> Michael \(michka\) Kaplan <> wrote:
> >> Can the authors (or reformatters) of Unicode Technical Reports please
> >> keep the use of "fancy" HTML and Javascript in TR's to a minimum?
> >> Tables and simple stylesheets ought to be sufficient. This is not an
> >> elaborate sales or marketing presentation, after all -- it's a
> >> TECHNICAL REPORT. Please don't tell me to update or change my browser
> >> to get the "full experience" of the TR. I should be able to print the
> >> thing on dead trees and get all the information that way if I choose.
> >
> > Well, some people might actually prefer you upgrade your browser to
> > something that supports Unicode a bit more effectively, at the very
> > least. :-)
> >
> > NN 4.0x has tons of problems with bidi and other complex scripts, with
> > Asian characters, and more. Its not entirely unreasonable for the
> > online resources of the Unicode Consortium to make use of technologies
> > that support Unicode and not be obliged to test everything on older
> > browsers that do not. I think its likely that they did not even know
> > that such an issue would exist, since they have upgraded to browsers
> > and technologies that support the very standard they are writing for.
> This has nothing to do with bidi, Asian characters, or any other aspect
> of Unicode support. I know that some of the TR's, such as TR 21, "Case
> Mapping," include UTF-8 characters and these generally do not print
> correctly using older browsers. I know about this problem and deal
> (reluctantly) with it. This is not about any Unicode-related problem,
> but about advanced HTML. TR 19 is tagged as UTF-8, but contains only
> one UTF-8 character (U+00A9 COPYRIGHT SIGN), and this is clearly not
> where my problem lies.
> I understand the need and desirability to use Unicode features in a
> Unicode technical report, I just don't see the major advantage of
> embedding Javascript in one.
> I wonder if Erik or some other Netscape person can examine the TR and
> figure out what NN 4.06 doesn't like about it.

The problem you cite in TR #22 (e.g. 2.2 History) and other parts which
don't print well use the <PRE> tag. For example,

<H3>2.2 <A name="History">History</A></H3>
<history supercedes="CP501" derivedFrom="CP500">
  <modified version="2" date="1999-09-25">
   Added Euro.
  <modified version="1" date="1997-01-01">
   Made out of whole cloth for illustration.

Note that within the <PRE> tags, there are also other HTML-tag like
elements. This is causing the problem -- NN is ignoring them in
printing. (cf. Even within the <PRE> tags, you are supposed to regard
tags like "<B>" as HTML elements and not show them.) I will put aside
the question as to whether or not this is a bug in NN but from a
practical point of view, the authors can avoid this problem by escaping
the special characters, i.e. "&lth;" for "<" and "&gth;" for ">", within
the <PRE> tags.

> > As a side note, I do not test code on my Osborne 1 or my Epson PX-8,
> > either. :-)
> Nor I on my Timex Sinclair 2000 or Atari 130XE. But I hardly think of
> Windows 95 and NN 4.06 as being quite as ancient as that.
> -Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California

Katsuhiko Momoi
Netscape International Client Products Group

What is expressed here is my personal opinion and does not reflect official Netscape views.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:05 EDT