On 2011-05-03 00:47, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, Kornel Lesi�~Dski wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 07:18:52 -0000, Ian Hickson<[email protected]> wrote:
For example, markup such as the following is sadly common:
<p/>Hello world!</p>
I have therefore not changed the spec in response to this request.
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
That just makes the HTML syntax even more complicated and confusing. At
least at present it's consistent in this respect (although not in many
other respects).
I'm kinda with Aryeh on this. I don't really see much value in adding yet
another special case here. Consider how this will be in 30 years, once
we've added another dozen elements: "Yes,<foo/> is a closed element. No,
you can't do that with<p/>. Or<ul/>. You can do it with<bar/>, sure."
Yeah but something like <p/> hardly makes sense syntax wise, as it's
basically an empty paragraph.
I'm guessing that many are using <p/> or <p> with no closing equivalent
as the same as <br><br> (or <br /> <br /> )
Is there a need for say a <pbr> ? (short for paragraph break) default
behavior being the same as two <br>.
Then again getting folks to change would be hard, so maybe a <cp> and
</cp> would make more sense. (closed paragraph)
Myself I always tend to use <br><br> for readability when I don't feel
like the text should be split into different paragraphs.
And I use <p> and </p> for it's intended purpose, to markup actual
paragraphs.
Now if <p> was turned into a synonym for <br><br> and </p> simply
ignored, I'd be happy to move to using say <cp> and </cp> for paragraphs.
--
Roger "Rescator" Hågensen.
Freelancer - http://www.EmSai.net/
