W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > September 1996

Re: short-tag considered unhealthy

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:26:44 -0700
Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960911232644.0075ac48@pop.intergate.bc.ca>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 04:03 PM 9/11/96 CDT, Michael Sperberg-McQueen wrote:

>On the other hand -- there are one or two uses of SHORTTAG that I don't
>think complicate parsing all that much, and might be retained:
>  - empty end-tags

Please, no; these save a tiny number of bytes, make it harder for
both humans and computers to understand, and for people who don't
already know SGML, have to be explained.  Also, on purely CS-theory
grounds, they push an XML parser over the edge from a pure automaton
to something that has to keep a stack.  OK, the cost of keeping a stack
is not high, but neither is the benefit of using </>.

The rest seem like good things for XML:

>  - attribute values without quotes around them
>  - the omission of attributes which have default values.

Cheers, Tim Bray
tbray@textuality.com http://www.textuality.com/ +1-604-488-1167
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 1996 19:23:35 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:03:20 EDT