RE: Other possible issues with the Polyglot draft

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry S. Thompson [mailto:ht@inf.ed.ac.uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, 2012 January 11 11:56
> To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Other possible issues with the Polyglot draft
> 
> ht writes:
> 
> > 3) 'void' elements [3] -- the name is non-standard, and the
> >    requirement:
> >
> >   "Polyglot markup uses the minimized tag syntax for void elements,
> >    e.g. <br/>, rather than the alternative syntax <br></br>."
> 
> Well, necessary, but overly restrictive.  "<br></br>" will not work as
> HTML, so it has to be avoided, but not mentioning "<br />" is a
> mistake -- it should be explicitly offered, don't you think?

As long as tag-name-trailing white space is always ignored within 
a start tag as should be the case, then I don't see why <br />
should be explicitly offered.

So the key question is whether such white space is allowable
and properly ignored.  If so, then I'd think mentioning <br/>
is tantamount to allowing <br /> and even <br
/>.

paul

Received on Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:38:25 UTC