RE: how to close html tags : link, meta,...
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Andrew Welch > Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 2:37 PM > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: how to close html tags : link, meta,... > > > > Nope. XHTML *is* XML. A browser that does understand <div></div> but > > doesn't > > understand <div/> clearly does not conform to the XHTML standard. > > All elements other than those declared in the DTD as EMPTY must have an > end tag. Elements that are declared in the DTD as EMPTY can have an end > tag or can use empty element shorthand > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#h-4.3 > > So, <div> should become <div></div>. Nope. You just cited it: it doesn't matter whether it's <div/> or <div></div>. A browser that treats both differently simply doesn't conform to the spec. > This is straying from the point. The point is that if <foo></foo> and > <foo/> are identical, and MSXML decides on an identity transform to > output <foo></foo> - why can't this be made available as a command line > choice. Because it doesn't matter for XML? > It wouldn't break anyone's output, it would merely help 1000's (probably > much more) of xslt'ers. I simply cannot understand anyone arguing > against the addition of this. Even the xml spec states that its > optional... (http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210#sec-starttags). It would help for people that try to feed XHTML into non-XHTML compliant browsers. Why do you try this in the first place? Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format