- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 12:05:58 +0100
- To: David Dorward <david@us-lot.org>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Quoting David Dorward <david@us-lot.org>: >>> (My perception here is that Ann was expressing the false argument for >>> XHTML that making all tags non-optional produces a better defined parse >>> tree; which basically fails to realise that the tags are implied, even >>> though not physically present.) > >> I'm not sure how tags can ever be implied in XHTML. > > They can't. That is the main difference between HTML and XHTML. The > point is that XHTML does not create a better defined parse tree > because of this. It does. When I use some random element in XHTML I know what the tree will look like. In HTML you don't really know that. HTML was also build with the assumption that documents would be valid... -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2005 11:06:20 UTC