W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > January 2008

Re: [selectors-api] Best practice in HTML wellformed documents

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:09:52 +0100
To: "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, "Diego La Monica (IWA/HWG)" <d.lamonica@webprofession.com>
Cc: public-webapi@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.t4bbaqqkwxe0ny@widsith.local>

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:06:43 +0100, Lachlan Hunt  
<lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au> wrote:
...
> While XHTML imposes the requirement to explicitly close all elements, it  
> is not required in HTML.  In HTML, end tags for some elements, including  
> those above, may be omitted.  This is a feature inherited from HTML's  
> origin as an application of SGML.
...
> I decided to omit the end tags from the markup because they were  
> unnecessary, it made the example markup smaller and, IMHO, clearer to  
> read.  Therefore, since the current example actually is conforming, I  
> have not changed it at this time.  Please let me know if you are not  
> satisfied with this response.

I have a personal preference for using well-formed XHTML for examples over  
HTML - it is easier for me to see where the element boudaries are, so the  
small price in verbosity gives greater clarity. It is also simpler to  
copy/paste into an XHTML *or* HTML document and have it work.

As far as I know the group has never resolved a particular preference for  
terse HTML markup over XHTML. Does anyone think that the value of such a  
resolution would justify the debate it will entail?

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 January 2008 17:10:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:19:00 GMT