Matt Brock wrote:

> You'll spend more cycles looking up whether this tag is self-closing
> or that one isn't, when you could just say, heck with it, just follow a
> simple pattern that all the browsers will understand and leave the dogma at
> the doorstep.

http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml

----------
  * The "/>" empty tag syntax actually has totally different meaning in
    HTML4. (It's the SHORTTAG minimisation feature known as NET, if I
    recall the name correctly.) Specifically, the XHTML

      <p> Hello <br /> World </p>

    ...is, if interpreted as HTML4, exactly equivalent to:

      <p> Hello <br>&gt; World </p>

    ...and should really be rendered as:

      Hello
      > World
----------

So shouldn't Stripes be preferring ">" over "/>", or is the issue that 
HTML 4.01 browsers will cope OK with "/>" even though it is strictly 
incorrect, whereas if we use ">" and not "/>" and someone *does* send a 
XHTML 1.0 page with the correct MIME type (application/xhtml+xml) it 
will blow up in the XML parser?

-- 
Alan Burlison
--

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
Stripes-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/stripes-users

Reply via email to