W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2006

[whatwg] Empty elements

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:49:15 +1100
Message-ID: <43F3BDFB.9030509@lachy.id.au>
Tim Altman wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:48:57 +0100, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Tim Altman wrote:
>>>
>>> May OBJECT and CANVAS be treated as empty elements, i.e. <canvas /> and
>>> <object /> if there is no fallback content?
>>
>> I don't understand your question.
> 
> Let me rephrase: Is it valid for the object and canvas elements use the 
> empty element syntax?

HTML: No, XHTML: Yes.

>> If you mean "Can the string '<object/>' be treated as an empty element
>> tag", the answer is no.
> 
> You seem to have answered my question here.  Why not?

Because it is XML syntax, not HTML syntax.

According SGML rules, <foo/> has a different meaning from the same 
syntax in XML.  According to the new HTML5 parsing rules (due to 
complete lack of support for SGML), the '/' is an easy parse error and 
is essentially ignored.  Backwards compatibility reasons prevent the XML 
meaning from being retrofitted into HTML.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 15 February 2006 15:49:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:26 UTC