|
|
Posted by Jonathan N. Little on 02/16/07 15:20
robert maas, see http://tinyurl.com/uh3t wrote:
>> From: "Steve Pugh" <steve.gru...@gmail.com>
>>> While <tag /> is a perfectly acceptable non-container XML tag,
>> Correct.
>> It has a different (but valid) use in HTML. However that use has never
>> been supported by browsers. It should be avoided in HTML for a mix of
>> practical and technical reasons.
>
> OK, so you're saying I should avoid that syntax.
>
>> The only thing that comes close to a transition between HTML and
>> XHTML is Appendix C of the XHTML spec which recommends the use of
>> <br /> for empty elements ...
>
> So that appendix says to go ahead and use <br />.
> Since you disagree on that point, I assume you believe that
You seem to go round and round on this like a June Bug on a string.
Look if your document in *new* Use DocType:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
And do *not* use XHTML's single tag element syntax
<br /> <hr /> <img /> <link />
Do not use XHTML unless you have a compelling reason to do so. 99.99% of
the time you don't. "Because its cool" and "because X, Y, or Z, says
HTML is dead and XHTML is the future" are not good reasons. Also since,
whether you like it or not, the most popular browser does not handle
XHTML when served properly is another reason not to use it.
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
[Back to original message]
|