Re: Void elements in HTML (Was: ZIP-based packages and URI references into them ODF proposal)

Hi Julian,

On Dec 30, 2008, at 3:44 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

>
> Robert J Burns wrote:
>> ...
>> I do disagree with Julian that we should never introduce new block  
>> level elements. As I've said in the past the parsing algorithm  
>> (currently ...
>
> I didn't say that.

Sorry, I misspoke there. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. Is  
it correct that you want to not allow the introduction of new void  
elements (rather than what I said you said: not introducing new block  
elements))? Is that what you said? I do disagree with that part of  
what you're saying (if indeed you said that). I think that if we  
correct the currently messed up parsing algorithm, we can accommodate  
block, inline and void elements in future HTMLs with much less pain  
than we're experiencing now and in a way that is both forward and  
backwards compatible. It seems quite ironic that we have the WhatWG  
here proposing that we make HTML5 work in a way that will not allow  
for backwards compatibility down the road.

Take care,
Rob