[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Well-Formed SNAFU

• From: "WorldNet" <csgallagher@w...>
• To: "XML Developer" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 10:10:49 -0500

I've noticed that Netscape Communicator 4.x ignores <br/> and haven't tried
same with IE4.x as I've upgraded to IE5. What techniques are going to be
developed to account for this backwards compatibility issue if one creates
otherwise well-formed documents? Must we count on the DOM and script our way
into redundancy again? Would 'inline redundancy' be a strategy as in the
form of <br><br/> or would this break the current and future processors
while addressing the foibles of the earlier releases?

Lastly, I thought I read somewhere to use <br /> using white space and when
I use this technique this seems to be recognized by Communicator 4.x *and*
IE5 but I wonder again about generalized usage in this regard with respect
to maintaining a well-formed document.

If this white space technique for empty tags is to be the way it should be
done why do I not see this technique used in the examples that are being
published? I hope to remind those of you who have a grasp on usage that most
of us are engaged in 'monkey see - monkey do'.

=======================================
Clinton Gallagher
NET cpio@m...
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com




xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • re: Well-Formed SNAFU
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: Well-Formed SNAFU
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XSL Challenge
• Next by Date: Re: Namespaces are dead.
• Previous by thread: Re: Overloaded URIs (was Re: XLink: behavior must go!)
• Next by thread: Re: Well-Formed SNAFU
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread