[whatwg] Allow trailing slash in always-empty HTML5 elements?
ian at hixie.ch
Wed Nov 29 14:20:39 PST 2006
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Steve Runyon wrote:
> Thanks Ian - so is it fair to say that self-closing singletons should be
> _allowed_ but not _required_ -- that either syntax would be accepted as
> valid HTML5? That only makes sense to me -- it's backward-compatible
> while allowing XHTML compatibility as well.
It's a compelling argument.
I think basically the argument is "it would help people" and the counter
argument is "it would confuse people". We need evidence to back up these
arguments so we can make a solid decision. The only relevant data I have
is that 50% of the web uses trailing slashes, and only 17% uses XHTML.
This could be used to back up either argument: "clearly people think that
trailing slashes are allowed, so we should allow them", and "clearly
people are confused about trailing slashes, so we should get rid of them
altogether". I don't know which is best.
> Your point about '<p />test' being the same as '<p>test</p>' is very
To clarify, '<p />test' is the same as '<p>test</p>' because it's the same
as '<p >test' -- the "/" character is completely ignored by browsers.
> That's not something I've ever done (that I'm aware of, anyway), and it
> surprises me that it works that way. As a divergent example -- at least
> in IE6 -- '<div />' is treated as an inline element rather than a
> block...that's probably non-standard behavior, and in any case it was a
> surprise when I encountered it.
Could you show an example of this? I couldn't reproduce the behaviour you
describe. In my tests, in text/html content, <div> and <div /> acted
exactly the same, in all browsers that I tested it with.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg