- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 10:24:25 +0300
- To: Neil Soiffer <Neils@dessci.com>
- Cc: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "Public MathML mailing list" <www-math@w3.org>
On Apr 3, 2008, at 20:59, Neil Soiffer wrote: > I'm getting a little confused. It seems like the following is true: > > • <script/> is treated like <script> in all browsers -- it will > match against </script> Yes. > • In all browsers, an unclosed script is not executed At least for contemporary values of all. > • Firefox v1 and v2 differ in how they treat unterminated scripts, > but that difference is irrelevant for this case. It changed between 2 and 3, but yes. > It seems like the consensus is that for MathML and SVG namespaces > (and maybe any non-HTML namespace), <foo/> should be considered > empty. Nothing breaks in HTML because of this, and it enables > MathML, SVG, and other XML-based syntaxes. Assuming that is true, > that seems like a very positive development from this thread. Yes, /> needs to be honored for MathML and SVG elements but must not be honored for HTML elements. /> is still allowed in validation for void HTML elements. (So the validator complains about <div/> but not about <br/>.) -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 4 April 2008 07:25:11 UTC