2 ms·
Ah, you're correct, I misremembered that. It's only invalid with XML, but it's been a long time since valid html was valid XML I guess. Fwiw, at least chrome a
by 411111111111111 6y ago
Ah, you're correct, I misremembered that. It's only invalid with XML, but it's been a long time since valid html was valid XML I guess.
Fwiw, at least chrome autocorrected it before rendering... Though that might be out of date as well? Idk
- chrismorgan 6y agoAutocorrected XML? I don’t think any browsers have ever been willing to render invalid XML or XHTML that was invalid XML, though I wouldn’t write an affidavit to that effect. I can speak confidently that Firefox would always complain of any XML invalidity in your XML or XHTML document, rather than rendering it.
- 411111111111111 6y agoNor have I ever written about autocorrected XML? I misremembered that the quotes where mandatory in html. They're only mandatory in XML. Initially, html was also valid XML. It's been quite a long time since then, so I accepted that Quotes definitely aren't mandatory anymore. it's not like I wrote a lot... Or are you somehow mixing up my comment about chrome adding quotes to html attributes before it renders the DOM? And heck, I'm not even sure if that's even still the case. I just roughly remember looking at KHTML Code Back around 2008 and thinking "that's smart, you just make certain the data is how you want it to be for easier handling"
- chrismorgan 6y agoNah, HTML was never valid XML. It started from SGML and didn’t close (most?) tags. Plenty of years later, XHTML rebased HTML atop XML, but failed in its efforts to convince people that this was worthwhile.
- jimsmart 6y agoNo idea why you are downvoted, this is totally accurate.