[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Understanding why <tag></tag> is the way it is (wa
On 8/3/07, Norman Gray <norman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 1. <p></p> (fully normalised form) > 2. -> <p</p> (you didn't have to close tags if you were starting a > new one immediately) > 3. -> <p</> (use the null end tag </> to close the most recently > started element) > 4. -> <p/> (if you had redefined the NET string from '</' to '/'). > > ...and <p/> was deemed to look adequately pretty (I might be > misremembering this slightly, but it was something very like that). ...and so the empty element was born? > Norman > [drifting down memory lane] That's some great information Norman - thanks! If only there was a pub quiz question on how the empty element syntax came about... :) -- http://andrewjwelch.com
|
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
|