W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > December 2001

Is XHTML 1.0 2nd ed. Section 4.3 really informative?

From: ITO Tsuyoshi <tsuyoshi@is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 02:16:26 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20011222.021626.74163670.tsuyoshi@is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>
To: www-html@w3.org
Dear list,

(I am new to this list and I do not know whether this is the right list
 to post this.  Let me know if not.)

I have just started reading XHTML 1.0 Second Edition Working Draft (as
of 4 October 2001) and I am surprised to see that whole Section 4
became informative.

Section 4.3 ``For non-empty elements, end tags are required'' says:
> All elements other than those declared in the DTD as EMPTY must have
> an end tag.
Is this restriction stated in the normative part of the Working Draft?

According to Section 4.3, for example, <span> element must not be
written as ``<span />'' even if its content is empty; <span> element
must have an end tag, so it must be written as ``<span></span>''.

To me, it is natural to forbid shorthand representation such as
``<span />'', because HTML 4.01 parsers might regard it as the
beginning of an element, look for the corresponding end tag and get
confused.  Therefore, I am afraid that some statement is missing in
the normative part of the Working Draft.

Excuse me and let me know if this issue was already discussed before.
I tried to find related articles in the list archive, but found
nothing.

Any related information or pointer is welcome.  Thank you.

Best wishes,
ITO Tsuyoshi

-- ITO Tsuyoshi  <tsuyoshi@is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> --
-- Department of Information Science           --
--                  in the University of Tokyo --
Received on Friday, 21 December 2001 12:16:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:50 GMT