RE: how to close html tags : link, meta,...
> > 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. I don't understand. I'm it states that all element's in the xhtml dtd that are not declared as empty should have a closing tag. Those that are declared as empty may or may not have a closing tag (in other words may or may not use the empty element syntax). It doesn't say that <div></div> should be allowed to be written as <div/>. > > 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? Nor do a lot of features, but they are here and being used everyday. Saying 'it doesn't matter for xml' is being very short sited. > > 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? I give up.... 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