-Txhtml produces <p/> tags..

-Txhtml produces <p/> tags..

[Steffen Nurpmeso]

Hello,

validator.w3.org "successfully checked as XHTML 1.0 Strict!" this,
but i don't know why, since <p> is a block element (not EMPTY).
I guess the validator is too stupid to check against the DTD, and
a lonely <p/> may be just as correct as <br /> is, but i dunno.
Is this a known issue / deliberate decision / or am i plain wrong?

--steffen
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv

Re: -Txhtml produces <p/> tags..

[Joerg Sonnenberger]

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 03:51:49PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> validator.w3.org "successfully checked as XHTML 1.0 Strict!" this,
> but i don't know why, since <p> is a block element (not EMPTY).
> I guess the validator is too stupid to check against the DTD, and
> a lonely <p/> may be just as correct as <br /> is, but i dunno.

<p/> and <p></p> mean different things. It really should produce the
latter.

Joerg
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv

Re: -Txhtml produces <p/> tags..

[Kristaps Dzonsons]

On 11/09/2014 15:56, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 03:51:49PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> validator.w3.org "successfully checked as XHTML 1.0 Strict!" this,
>> but i don't know why, since <p> is a block element (not EMPTY).
>> I guess the validator is too stupid to check against the DTD, and
>> a lonely <p/> may be just as correct as <br /> is, but i dunno.
>
> <p/> and <p></p> mean different things. It really should produce the
> latter.

Jorgen,

Care to be more specific?  XML says that any elements without children 
may use the minimised form, making <p /> be perfectly valid in XHTML 
strict.  However, section C.3 of the XHTML1.0 spec specifically 
mentions, in the interests of HTML compatibility, that this should only 
happen for EMPTY elements.  So valid XHTML, but not encouraged. 
However, as I intend to migrate the entire -Thtml and -Txhtml to HTML5, 
which disallows this, the issue will soon be moot...

Best,

Kristaps
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv

Re: -Txhtml produces <p/> tags..

[Kristaps Dzonsons]

On 11/09/2014 17:03, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote:
>
>
> On 11/09/2014 15:56, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 03:51:49PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> validator.w3.org "successfully checked as XHTML 1.0 Strict!" this,
>>> but i don't know why, since <p> is a block element (not EMPTY).
>>> I guess the validator is too stupid to check against the DTD, and
>>> a lonely <p/> may be just as correct as <br /> is, but i dunno.
>>
>> <p/> and <p></p> mean different things. It really should produce the
>> latter.
>
> Jorgen,

Er... sorry for mis-naming you.  I mean Joerg!
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv

Re: -Txhtml produces <p/> tags..

[Joerg Sonnenberger]

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote:
> Care to be more specific?  XML says that any elements without
> children may use the minimised form, making <p /> be perfectly valid
> in XHTML strict.  However, section C.3 of the XHTML1.0 spec
> specifically mentions, in the interests of HTML compatibility, that
> this should only happen for EMPTY elements.  So valid XHTML, but not
> encouraged. However, as I intend to migrate the entire -Thtml and
> -Txhtml to HTML5, which disallows this, the issue will soon be
> moot...

I can't quote the docs at the moment, but if you have been using DOM
manipulation a lot, you know that the empty form tends to result in very
surprising results.

Joerg
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv