W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2004

[whatwg] Re: DOCTYPE shouldn't be optional

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:56:24 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0408171655090.16813@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Malcolm Rowe wrote:
>
> Ian Hickson writes:
> > > .. and some of the DOM code, like whether anonymous elements exist 
> > > in the DOM, iirc.
> >
> > "Anonymous elements"?
> 
> Possibly not the correct term. Isn't it accurate to say that in HTML, a 
> TBODY element is only present in the DOM if it is actually present in 
> the source, while in XHTML, a TBODY element is created in the DOM even 
> if it isn't present in the source?

Other way around. The term is "implied elements", by the way. (That is, 
the ones in HTML are implied; in XHTML they are just missing!)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2004 09:56:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:36 UTC