On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:49:15 +0100, Lachlan Hunt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tim Altman wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:48:57 +0100, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Tim Altman wrote:
May OBJECT and CANVAS be treated as empty elements, i.e. <canvas />
and
<object /> if there is no fallback content?
I don't understand your question.
Let me rephrase: Is it valid for the object and canvas elements use
the empty element syntax?
HTML: No, XHTML: Yes.
Gah! Of course. Thank you. :)
If you mean "Can the string '<object/>' be treated as an empty element
tag", the answer is no.
You seem to have answered my question here. Why not?
Because it is XML syntax, not HTML syntax.
According SGML rules, <foo/> has a different meaning from the same
syntax in XML. According to the new HTML5 parsing rules (due to
complete lack of support for SGML), the '/' is an easy parse error and
is essentially ignored. Backwards compatibility reasons prevent the XML
meaning from being retrofitted into HTML.
Got it.
--
Tim Altman
