W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > February 2009

SHORTTAG </> again

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:36:39 +0100
Message-Id: <hbf.20090227gf9r@bombur.uio.no>
To: public-html-comments@w3.org
This got to be a FAQ, but... what's happened to </>?  Have I missed
somthing or is that gone from the HTML5 draft?

I never understood why previous HTML standards discouraged its use.
Empty end tags ought to be an efficient way to combat badly nested tags,
like <b><a></b></a>.  Non-empty end tags are half of what makes the
problem possible in the first place.  (Other half: optional end tags.)

Support for </> would hopefully get people to use it for the sake of
less typing and shorter documents.  Where they do, there won't be any
<b><a></b></a> for browsers to render differently.  Then the browser
won't protect the author from seeing his mistake before he inflicts it
on the Web.

Other SHORTTAGs I don't miss.  In particular "<name1<name2>" and
"<name/.../".  If they wanted optional abbreviations, why not
"<name/...>" instead so SGML would allow use of <> as ordinary
readable parenthesis and no verbose end tags?  <p/foo<strong/bar>>.
Come to think of it, any chance of that in future HTML/XML?

-- 
Hallvard
Received on Friday, 27 February 2009 17:33:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:13:59 GMT