On 14 May 2008, at 05:26, Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
Nikita wrote:
the META tag would have to end in a /> and then it
wouldn't be valid HTML anymore.
I encourage you to try that with the W3C validator. You will
not get the result you expect.
Comes back as valid HTML, as I expected.
It usually isn't: http://tinyurl.com/3unkuu
Since <foo /> is (in HTML) the same as <foo>>, and character data
(including >) is not allowed in the <head> element, then the only way
you could get this to be valid would be to use HTML 4.01 Transitional,
ommit the optional end tag for the head element and start tag for the
body element, and make the meta element the last thing in the head
element (thus causing the trailing greater than sign to be the first
character of data in the body).
The validator did flag "/>" as warnings which it did not a few years
back when the example was originally created.
A reaction to the number of people using XHTML syntax in HTML without
understanding the implications.
But W3C's validator warning messages are overly cautious
Depending on error recovery features (or bugs) in browsers simply
isn't wise.
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
