- From: <lee@sq.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Oct 96 22:38:26 EDT
- 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 <e.br> or <@br> 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 :-) Lee
Received on Monday, 14 October 1996 22:38:35 UTC