- From: Maniac <Maniac@SoftwareManiacs.Org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 20:57:18 +0400
- To: Adam Kuehn <akuehn@nc.rr.com>
- CC: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-style@w3.org
Adam Kuehn wrote: > So assuming that is a correct summary, is there some reason the CSS WG > would be unwilling to make those relatively minor changes in the name > of promoting careful authorship? (I take it for granted that most of > the people reading this list would not leave an unclosed paragraph in > their own code.) I won't speak for a majority of readers, just for myself. I'm not a spec writer or WG participant, but an author who actually reads specs. I confess that I deliberately use unclosed <P>'s, <LI>'s, <TD>'s and anything else that HTML 4.01 allows to leave unclosed. Since it's easier to write by hand. And speaking from this position I find this whole thread amusingly nitpicking with a notable exception of Ian trying to deliver a very simple point of view: examples are examples. They are about to help people understand things, not to satisfy every validator of every language on earth. And this means that they'd rather be spare of any visual clutter. In this particular example (with unclosed <P>) I think lowering <P> and closing it will be absolutely pointless. It won't make notion of anonymous block any clearer.
Received on Friday, 26 August 2005 17:05:04 UTC