- From: Bronislav Klučka <Bronislav.Klucka@bauglir.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 13:56:09 +0200
On 29.8.2011 12:17, Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > 29.8.2011 13:10, Simon Pieters wrote: > >>> In which way is "void" better than "empty"? >> >> The sentence "<p></p> is an empty element since it has no content, but p >> is not an empty element." is more confusing. > > More confusing than what? (Is that hypothetical sentence more > confusing than "<p></p> is a void element since it has no content, but > p is not a void element."?) > > Previously, "empty element" was used as a technical term, and <p></p> > was not called an empty element. If somewhat calls it that way, > doesn't that just call for a correction and a pointer to a definition, > rather than changing the term? > Hi, it is not confusing at all, empty element is an element with no content (<p></p>), void element is element that can have no content... the difference is clear, but yes... void is not the best name Brona
Received on Monday, 29 August 2011 04:56:09 UTC