Re: Offtopic: html gurus ... is <br /> valid ?
"Eric G . Miller" <egm2@jps.net> wrote:
>Surfed over to salon.com with the links browser and <br /> showed up all
>over the place. So I looked at the source, and sure enough, there was
><br /> all over the place. Now it's my understanding that browsers are
>supposed to ignore tags they don't understand -- which links is clearly
>not doing -- but what on earth could be the purpose of such a thing?
I think it's just another SGML SHORTTAG construct, like </>. I agree
that it shouldn't be used in HTML.
>Ouch, just noticed </li>'s. Those aren't needed either are they? There
>isn't even an environment for the <li> tags!
</li>, on the other hand, is useful and legal; I often use it to make it
clear to myself where paragraphs begin and end within lists.
What do you mean by "environment" here?
>Netscape renders this stuff fine -- must be exceedingly tolerant.
Netscape and IE will both render pretty much anything you throw at them
in some way. Given the sort of thing they have to deal with on a regular
basis, this is probably useful, though it might be nice if a major
browser broke on some of the more major abuses so that people would stop
doing them!
(E.g. Tripod. Whoever decided they wanted to dump Javascript at the
front of every document in their users' home pages, before any <html>
tags, was clearly either very stupid or very lazy.)
--
Colin Watson [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: