Re: A New Element

Correct me if my assumption is wrong Leo, but I think you're saying this:

<div>
  <p>Text <b>bold</b> more text
</*>
The wildcard closes the paragraph and div tags that are unclosed, thus
eliminating the need for the closing tags.

The problem I would see would be with nesting. For example:

<div>
  <p> Text here
<div>
  <p> Another paragraph and div
</*>

Could be either two divs in sequence, or two divs nested within one
another. Who determines which one it is? And if we change the logic to make
that assumption than why have the wildcard closer at all? It seems like we
could just go with opening tags only, and then assume that if there's a new
opening tag then the last one is closed... but again, what if I want to
nest them?

Overall, I think it would introduce an unmanageable level of complex
variation.

-Greg


On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 8:12 AM, Martin Janecke <w3.org@prlbr.com> wrote:

> On 20.05.15 01:07, Leo Wilson wrote:
>
>> I think you should in you next recommendation you
>> should include a “</*>” element that would close all elements except
>> for head, body, and html elements.  This would help, …
>>
>
> Leo, in which situation would that help? Why would, say, <b>…</*> be
> better than <b>…</b>?
>
> Or do you mean that it would save authors time because they can quickly
> close open elements without checking what the open elements are? But if
> they don't check, how do they know they want to close these elements at
> that point?
>
>  … and would also
>> encourage proper syntax with the closing of elements, one thing that
>> HTML 5 doesn’t absolutely require to operate without errors.
>>
>
> I'm not sure I understand this. How would it encourage proper closing? I
> suspect that a new wildcard closing tag would rather encourage people to
> stop using the most proper, readable tag that uses the same name as the
> element's opening tag.
>
> An example may help to illustrate your idea. Can you please provide one?
>
> Thanks, Martin
>