- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:31:19 +0000 (UTC)
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, fantasai wrote: > > One way of drawing the line might be, does dropping this requirement > result in a semantically-meaningful representation? An empty list > represents an empty list. But a <meta> without a 'name', or a <link> > without a 'href': these, per spec, represent nothing. They do not even > provide any structural semantics as <div> and <span> do; the document > has the same semantics as if the element did not exist. Another way of drawing it could be "does it cause any harm". Markup like: <em><p>...</em></p> ...causes harm because it is not representable in a sane DOM structure. Markup like: <p><em><p>Foo</p></em></p> ...arguably causes harm because its meaning is not defined, and so UAs would be at a loss as to how to process it. But a blank <meta/> is not harmful, it is just meaningless. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2005 06:31:19 UTC