W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > October 1996

Re: B.10 Empty elements?

From: <lee@sq.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 96 22:38:26 EDT
Message-Id: <9610150238.AA02947@sqrex.sq.com>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
> Get ready to answer this same question a few hundred times 
> a year.  No matter how we explain it, the <e></e> looks redundant 
> for an EMPTY element and a lot of SGML hackers are taught not to 
> do it.  It will be a tough habit to break because from the 
> author's perspective, not the parser programmer, it looks like 
> YetAnotherReasonSGMLIsUgly.

Which is why I prefer something like
both of which are either legal with RCS or can be made legal with a
small change to the SGML declaration.  Sorry for beating a drum until
it breaks... but I have lousy metre  :-)

Received on Monday, 14 October 1996 22:38:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:04 UTC