Hacker News Reader

Comment by recursive | Hacker News Reader

Img and br are not allowed to be closed.

Worse, due to the aforementioned permissive error handling in HTML parsers, a closing </br> tag will end up inserting a second line break

You close them in the same tag:

    <br/>

This syntax is ignored in HTML. The / is thrown away and has no effect.

This non-closing talisman means that <div/> or <script/> are not closed, and will mess up nesting of elements.

In HTML, yes. But I thought the OP was talking about XHTML?

No. In XHTML, you are required to close your p and li tags. In HTML, the "self-closing" tag is meaningless. That slash doesn't do anything. You can't self-close a <script> or <div> tag. It only appears to work for tags that are don't allow closing.

We aren’t talking about p and li tags which require data to be embedded.

We are talking about self-contained tags such as br.

In XHTML (and XML in general) tags absolutely can be open and closed inside the same tag via the method I described:

    <br/>

Look it up if you don’t believe me. But this is correct.

Are we talking about HTML or XHTML?

In HTML, you can add the slash, but it has no effect. The spec explicitly says that the slash does not close the element. The fact that it's "br" does. So you are allowed to add that slash. But adding it does not close the element.

> On void elements, it does not mark the start tag as self-closing but instead is unnecessary and has no effect of any kind.

https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/syntax.html#start-tag...

In XHTML, normal XML rules apply, as you say. That's consistent with what I've said earlier in this thread also.

You’re now talking about HTML again, not XHTML!

Edit 2:

And I’m surprised you even needed to ask because the term “XHTML” has been used consistently. It really shouldn’t be confusing for someone of your obvious technical capabilities

Edit 1:

> In XHTML, normal XML rules apply, as you say. That's consistent with what I've said earlier in this thread also.

Except you haven’t said anything consistently. You keep trying to “educate” people without understanding the point they were making to begin with.

Ok. I don't think we really disagree on anything. You and I have both referred to HTML and XHTML elsewhere prior in this thread.

The original post also covers both. It seems at some point one of us was talking about one of them and the other assumed it was the other.

I thought I understood the point being made, but maybe not.

Wrong.[1]

> if the element is one of the void elements, or if the element is a foreign element, then there may be a single U+002F SOLIDUS character (/)

If you're going to be pedantic, at least be correct about it.

[1]: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/syntax.html#start-tag...

There can't however be a separate closing tag, which is a reasonable interpretation of the post you are replying to

Also the slash in <br /> explicitly has no effect, per specification.

You left out the rest of the spec:

> On void elements, it does not mark the start tag as self-closing but instead is unnecessary and has no effect of any kind. For such void elements, it should be used only with caution — especially since, if directly preceded by an unquoted attribute value, it becomes part of the attribute value rather than being discarded by the parser.

(The void elements are listed here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Void_eleme... )

All of that is a far cry from elements not being allowed to be closed. Please point to where the spec mentions that. MDN is not the spec.

It's the next sentence.

> On void elements, it does not mark the start tag as self-closing but instead is unnecessary and has no effect of any kind.

https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/syntax.html#start-tag...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com