W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2008

Re: Are new void elements really a good idea?

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 14:18:38 +0200
Message-ID: <48BA8C1E.4060905@gmx.de>
To: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>

Philip Taylor wrote:
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> The "<tagname />" syntax is not allowed in HTML4, and thus existing 
>> libraries that have been designed to produce HTML4 will not use it.
>>
>> On the other hand, what, except ideological reasons, stops us from 
>> allowing
>>
>>  <tagname></tagname>
>>
>> as well?
> 
> Allowing both syntaxes means there are more opportunities for authors to 
> get confused, and makes the language a bit more complex.
> ...

Agreed. It's always good if there's are fewer ways to do the same thing 
(an argument for XHTML, btw).

But that advantage needs to be weighed against the cost of breaking 
existing libraries, and the ability to evolve the language without 
having to rewrite code all over.

I don't think this has happened here.

BR, Julian
Received on Sunday, 31 August 2008 12:19:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:57 UTC