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

Re: Fixing what's broke

• From: Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>
• To: rjelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
• Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 06:38:34 +0000

On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 14:50:02 +1100
rjelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au> wrote:

>  So what about this then: if the concern is that providing </> would 
>  allow
>  people to create obscure markup where you would have track back to
> see what the start was (the distant matching bracket problem), and
> assuming it is the job of a markup language design to enforce good
> practice in the
>  first place (hmmm), why not just allow the short end-tag </> to be
> used only on leaf elements?
> 
>  So
>     <a>blah</>
>  is allowed, but not
>     <a>blah <b/>  blah </>


Accepting your arguments Rick, any idea of the complexity 
of implementing this? The other option might be simply
to offer either as valid, with your logic being the
suggestion as to when each should be used for legibility?




-- 

regards 

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

• References:
  • Fixing what's broke
    • From: Bill Lindsey <bill@blnz.com>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: rjelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: Ramkumar Menon <ramkumar.menon@gmail.com>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: Max Toro <maxtoroq@gmail.com>
  • Re: Fixing what's broke
    • From: rjelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>