- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:58:03 -0800
- To: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Nov 8, 2009, at 1:20 PM, Joe D Williams wrote: > >> >> For tracking purposes, I've opened the following bug: >> >> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8238 >> > > Thanks Sam, for offering this potential solution that deals with > both case sensitivity and the HTML void element. > > At the meeting, please excuse my misunderstanding of "void" > elements. For some reason I had the understanding of "void" as the > html case where the element markup > <... ...> > does not include the closing / and it is html OK (even required not > to have it?), and what I was thinking of as "empty" element where > the XML style > <... ... /> > closing / is required to end the element markup. That's a pretty good understanding. More specifically, <... ... /> is the "minimized" or "self-closing" syntax for an empty element. It's also possible to write an empty element like this: <... ...></... ...> > Now I see the relationship of the void and empty terms actually > relating to the same concept: No contained content; only attributes. I think Sam is just using the term "void" somewhat loosely. In HTML5, it only refers to elements that are considered empty without any explicit indicator of closing, i.e. your first example above. Regards, Maciej
Received on Monday, 9 November 2009 02:05:51 UTC