|
|
Posted by John Salerno on 02/02/06 23:16
David Dorward wrote:
> Besides, XHTML 2.0 isn't going to be backwards compatible with 1.0 anyway.
Excellent point. I suppose if XHTML will eventually take over (assuming,
of course), then XHTML 1.0 doesn't really help right now anyway.
>> I've never seen a problem with the /> tag yet
>
> I have. Conforming browsers treating XHTML as HTML (which they should when
> it is served as text/html[1] will treat <foo /> as <foo>> and display >
> characters all over the document.
This is what I've never seen. All the XHTML pages that I've tested, and
any pages I've visited that use XHTML tags, I've never seen this happen
with the tag. And I know they aren't being served as anything other than
html.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|