Re: Package(s) proposal(s): HTML_Image and HTML_Link.

... > > And I don't understand why it's overkill to have 2 small classes... ... > Seriously, HTML_Common purpose is not to add html tags to html documents, > but to handle html attributes and html outputs. It's used by other classes > and needs to be as fast as possible for these tasks. Please look at the > code. > > If you really want to add img and link, they'll have to be extra packages. > But I doubt the usefulness of such packages on a wider scale. I agree that these are overkill, and making them separate classes simply bloats everything. However, if they are wanted, we could create a meta class called HTML_Elements. But I personally don't think it would be worth the efforts for most elements. I'd rather have an HTML_Processor (I'm going to have to make a legacy release of that, too, I guess) which would parse and convert existing HTML to convert it between various standards and make it complient. I know HTML_Tidy does this, but having a PEAR class to do this would allow conversion on the fly. Klaus