- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 13:59:36 +0100
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 13:48:47 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 13:32:41 +0100, Julian Reschke >> <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >>> Just allow "<command/>". >> That just becomes a mess (if you mean that <command> should just be an >> open tag), as <a/>, <script/>, <textarea/> etc. can't be made to work >> that way, <br></br> parses as <br><br>, etc. Would make things very >> confusing for authors. > > What I meant is: > > - no new void elements > > - allow empty element notation (thus "<command></command>" and > "<command/>" are equivalent) for all new and future elements. > > This aligns the notation for new elements with XML. And makes them completely different from existing elements, as I tried to point out. Which is utterly confusing. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 31 December 2008 13:00:19 UTC