- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:50:31 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8038 --- Comment #11 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2009-10-27 16:50:31 --- (In reply to comment #10) I would say that this is only confusing to those who try to infer the rules of HTML without reading specs. They should also probably have a hang-up on <br></br>. Whether <br></br> is equivalent of <br/><br/> or not, currently depends on the user agent. In Opera plus the other 60% of desktop user agents, <br></br> is interpreted as you say. In ther rest it is interpreted as one <br>. Also, for </br> it is simple to say that </br> means <br>. As illogical as that is, it is also mostly pretty harmless. But to say that </img> means <img> is kind of pointless. The same goes for </source> - to say that it means <source> is pointless. Also, despite the <br></br> case, IE and Opera still agree to treat <hr></hr> as <hr/>, despite that it programmatically could have been interpreted as two <hr/><hr/>. And all the big 4 (or big 6, if include Chrome and KHTML) agree to ignore </img>. </br> thus seems like a clear exception. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 27 October 2009 16:50:33 UTC