On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 09:42:26 -0700 [email protected] wrote: > Jirka Kosek's message dated: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:27:10 +0200 > > > Ad point of generating empty <a/> elements -- empty <a> is valid > > XHTML Strict. The problem is that such markup doesn't work properly > > in some browsers that parse XHTML content as it was HTML content > > (ie. not using XML parser). > > I think one problem with <a/> is that the XHTML 1.0 standard says > (4.3), "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." While the > purpose of this is evidently to avoid things like '<p>...<p>...', > in a strict (perhaps perverse?) sense it requires <a></a> instead of > <a/>.
Read the xml spec. They are identical semantically. > > I have verified, for whatever it's worth, that Firefox will correctly > render something in XHTML that includes an empty anchor expressed as > <a id="someId"></a> but will display something erroneous if it > is <a id="someID"/> , a somewhat surprising result. Back to browser wars of years ago. try <a id='x' /> which pleases most browsers that I've seen. Note the extra space. HTH -- regards -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
