On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Stephen Gildea wrote: > The "<br />" is okay; but "<meta ... />" and "<link ... />" are problems > for ordinary HTML. Since Gerald points this out, I guess I was unclear > on just what tags you were going to change to have " />".
Well, you explicitly mentioned <br />, so Karl (unnecessarily) reverted the changes for <br /> and <hr />. Not a tragedy, but unnecessary work for him (and even more should makeinfo add support for both HTML and XHTML), > What's the harm in giving a DOCTYPE that states the HTML standard that > the output is the closest to conforming to? I agree, but I'd only do that if and only if the output generated really fully complies with the DOCTYPE in questions. According to Janis, this now seems to the case for the latest pre-release and HTML 4.01. Gerald -- Gerald "Jerry" [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/ _______________________________________________ Bug-texinfo mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-texinfo
