Re: short-tag considered unhealthy
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
firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.textuality.com/ +1-604-488-1167