- From: Howard, Kipp (LNG-CL) <Kipp.Howard@lexisnexis.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 09:35:26 -0700
- To: "'html-tidy@w3.org'" <html-tidy@w3.org>
Charles Reitzel [mailto:creitzel@rcn.com] wrote: > I'm not as confident about 2). > Still, because > they are equivalent, I would still prefer to go with a > consensus and/or > conservative decision than to add an yet-another-option on a > fairly minor > point. > > How about a compromise?: > <foo> > <bar /> > <bar></bar> > </foo> > > This way there is no tag elimination, but no gratuitous > newline between the > begin and end tags for empty elements. Unless others feel that the "<bar></bar>" should be converted "<bar />" for XML output only, I can go with what you suggest since they are equivalent. No option needed. Thanks. -- Kipp E. Howard - Sr. Software Engineer @ LexisNexis CourtLink kipp.howard@courtlink.com (425) 372-1837 or (800) 774-7317 ext 1837
Received on Friday, 12 July 2002 12:34:27 UTC