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

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

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 13:32:41 +0100
Message-ID: <495B6669.7040000@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: public-html@w3.org

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Right, but we disagree on this, as noted earlier in this thread. I have to
>>> balance all the various needs here. Some of these needs are better satisfied
>>> by introducing lots of new void elements frequently; other needs 
>> Which particular need requires introducing void elements?
> 
> <command> would be basically unusable if you had to include an end tag 
> each time.

Just allow "<command/>".

>>>> Could you please explain (or point to an explanation) why exactly it 
>>>> needs to be known beforehand whether something is block-level or 
>>>> not? It's certainly not needed for serializing a DOM, so I assume 
>>>> the parser needs to know for some reason?
>>> Block-level elements have to be known by the parser so that optional 
>>> </p> end tags can be implied.
>> Just make the </p> end tags required in this case. Problem solved.
> 
> This solves the problem for people who want to extend the language to add 
> new block-level elements, and instead introduces a problem for authors who 
> ...

The proposal was to require the end tag *in this case* (where elements 
not defined in HTML5 are being introduced). How would it affect people 
not interested in doing that?

BR, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 31 December 2008 12:33:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:00 UTC