5 ms·
I lived through the XHTML era; when I was doing web-design I adopted it for many projects. It just seemed right to rigorously enforce a formal approach, and I s
by MrVandemar 3y ago
I lived through the XHTML era; when I was doing web-design I adopted it for many projects. It just seemed right to rigorously enforce a formal approach, and I suspect it reduced errors.
Took me a long time to train myself out of <br/> afterwards though.
But the optional-style works I think for writing. Especially if you're just writing a document. If you don't have site-menus, a search bar, social-media sharing icons, javascript libraries and all the other paraphenalia and page-furniture of a website, then you are left with a lean and structured file.
- foobarbecue 3y agoYou mean </br>, presumably.
- throwaway_no 3y ago<br /> is a self closing tag. This is used in XML / XHTML for elements that have no contents. It is a valid short form of <br></br>
- thinkingemote 3y agotechnically <br></br> is not allowed to have an end tag in the HTML spec https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/br https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/br so it should be <br> on its own or <br />
- naniwaduni 3y agoA silly corner of the spec, considering that this is a spec that specifies exactly how to handle e.g. misnested elements and admits plenty of other things that read intuitively as standardized sloppiness.
- midasuni 3y agoNo. <br></br> is shortened to <br/>
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- foobarbecue 3y agoWow, thanks everyone... it seems I've misunderstood this all these years.
- pests 3y agoYou see this a lot in React/JSX too. Saves seme typing and noise inserting a component with no children.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]