- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:22:40 +0100
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:10:27 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > What's also utterly confusing is that > > <br/> > > parses just like > > <br> > > May be not confusing to experts like yourself, but certainly for many > authors. I'd love to see data that back this up, but even when assuming it's true, it's something we can't change. Introducing new void elements (that behave identically to <img>, <br>, etc.) is at least internally consistent. Introducing yet another syntax for elements introduced post-HTML4 is not and will lead to even bigger confusion. (Authors are already pretty confused that they have write e.g. <textarea></textarea> rather than <textarea/>. See e.g. the amount of duplicates on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162653 Your suggestion would just make that worse.) -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 31 December 2008 13:23:25 UTC