- From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 17:28:02 +0200
- To: WWW-HTML List <www-html@w3.org>
Charles E. Carroll wrote: > > Lars Eighner wrote: > > > >For example the name anchor is often kludged with > >as is done many, many times in the HTML draft itself. > > I'm afraid I don't understand. I thought > > <a name="foo"></a> > > was fine and dandy? What's the purpose of using > > <a name="foo"> </a> > > instead? (In fact, the former construction goes through the > "Kinder, Gentler" HTML Validator as HTML 4.0 just fine.) Empty anchors are indeed valid, and this has actually been confirmed by the HTML WG recently. Unfortunately, many browsers out there failed to correctly handle empty anchors so I, for one, use the second form to avoid possible problems. -- Arnaud Le Hors - W3C, User Interface Domain - www.w3.org/People/Arnaud
Received on Friday, 1 August 1997 11:28:09 UTC