Re: Caveat Tag Salad (Was: some ERB decisions)
On Sun, 20 Oct 1996 02:57:23 -0400, Arjun Ray <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>At 11:01 AM 10/17/96 CDT, Michael Sperberg-McQueen wrote:
>>The SGML ERB met Wed. Oct 16th and voted on
>> B.11 Should XML forbid, allow, or require empty end-tags (7.5)?
>The DPH and "graceful recovery" arguments seem to have carried the day.
>Yet, I'd like to point out (at the risk of bothersome repetition) that the
>*real life* experience of HTML suggests that we ignore the possibility of
>tag salad at our peril.
>Simply assuming that it's "obvious" people will get their nesting right,
>when explicit labelling of endtags makes the error particularly
>*non*-obvious, is *very* unwise, IMHO.
Is it accurate to conclude from your argument that:
1) It would be best to have *only* empty end-tags as that would guarantee proper
nesting in all cases (although not necessarily the nesting intended by the
2) If we allow (or require) named end-tags, we must also allow end-tags to be
omitted when the named end-tag of a containing element occurs (at least as the
required form of error recovery).
Charles F. Goldfarb * Information Management Consulting * +1(408)867-5553
13075 Paramount Drive * Saratoga CA 95070 * USA
International Standards Editor * ISO 8879 SGML * ISO/IEC 10744 HyTime
Prentice-Hall Series Editor * CFG Series on Open Information Management