(For those that don’t know about the two syntaxes for HTML: XML syntax for HTML is still a thing and probably always will be load data:application/xhtml+xml, in your browser as a starting point for a demonstration.) So yeah, I’m curious, because it looks deliberate. I hold that in HTML syntax the trailing slash is mildly harmful, because I almost never see it applied consistently so that the document wasn’t valid XML syntax anyway (for example, your site’s source has a ) and because it misleads people into thinking that it’s a way of closing elements. I can imagine some recommending it for XML compatibility (which is related to the original purpose of the ignore-the-trailing-slash behaviour, though slightly inverted in direction), but I don’t think I’ve ever encountered anyone saying so. Some hold that the trailing slash should be encouraged because it reminds the reader it’s a void element. (Except for in inline SVG and MathML content, which switch the parser into a more XML-like mode where the trailing slash behaves as in XML.) I know you’re not in that category. Some aren’t aware that the trailing slash is useless in the HTML syntax, simply being ignored by the parser and not doing anything.
#Proxyman localhost code#
Point of fairly idle curiosity about the presentation of the article: why do you put a trailing slash on your empty elements (img, link) in your code samples?
0 kommentar(er)
