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

Re: Short-term workarounds - - <source> in <video>

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:25:09 +0100
Message-ID: <4AE4DE55.80800@xn--mlform-iua.no>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Leif Halvard Silli On 09-10-25 00.34:

> Maciej Stachowiak On 09-10-24 01.27:
>> On Oct 23, 2009, at 3:41 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:


>>> Why can't HTML 5 permit that?
>> I think it would be reasonable (and perhaps on balance a good idea) to  
>> allow a close tag for new void elements. Though it would have to  
>> immediately follow the open tag - a close tag separated by content  
>> would have to be treated as just a stray close tag and a parse error.  
>> Otherwise the open tag alone wouldn't work, since you would have to  
>> parse to the end of the document to know if there is a close tag.
> 
> Sounds reasonable! Filed a bug report for the issue [1] including 
> a Liv DOM Viewer demo of browser behaviors [2].
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8038

There is also the option of making closing tags for void elements 
"obsolete but conforming".

I think it would be possible to have such a rule for *all* void 
elements - not only the new ones - as user agents deals with 
things like <img></img> anyhow.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Sunday, 25 October 2009 23:25:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:50 GMT