W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2014

Re: Optional tags

From: Jens O. Meiert <jens@meiert.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 15:52:04 -0200
Message-ID: <CAJ0g8QS-FSxvrg3z87oBqYzxq4946uWJ-D-kKcT_C_D_Lqv6Jg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeff Day <phroun@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
> Therefore translates to:
>
> <ul>
> <li><p>This</p><p>That
> </p></li><li><p>Another
> </p></li></ul>
>
> Which is ugly code, in my opinion.

Where would you see this code, if it just demonstrates where a
*parser* puts in omitted tags?

I’m wonderfully indifferent about getting into a debate here, so,
anyone who claims that

<!doctype html>
<title> </title>

(which is the shortest valid doc) is MORE complicated than

<!doctype html>
<html>
  <head>
    <title> </title>
  </head>
  <body>
  </body>
</html>

is either blind or in serious denial.

I’ve traditionally been very accepting of other developers or my teams
preferring to not omit tags, and, honoring personal preferences, also
don’t suggest everyone omit them, but it’s bullshit to say omitting
them results in more complicated code, or is less easy to write.
Complete bollocks.

-- 
Jens O. Meiert
http://meiert.com/en/
Received on Monday, 27 January 2014 17:52:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:37 UTC