• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easiertoauthor) XML
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 00:19:47 -0400
• References: <016901c21af5$f5275320$0200a8c0@e...><3D163BB5.31362495@p...> <01a201c21b00$de9127c0$0200a8c0@e...><3D16463F.4010407@t...><4.2.0.58.20020623183243.01967258@p...>

[Simon St.Laurent]

. In the meantime, the
> grumpy survivor of Dynamic HTML and the editor in me both scream that
short
> end tags would be a horrible mistake that will in fact add complexity in
> ways that go infinitely beyond a question-mark in the grammar.
>
 Plus, xhtml with short tags wouldn't work in standard browsers.


Cheers,

Tom P

• References:
  • Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easier to author) XML
    • From: "Rob Lugt" <roblugt@e...>
  • Re: Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easier to author) XML
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easier to author) XML
    • From: "Rob Lugt" <roblugt@e...>
  • Re: Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easierto author) XML
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easierto author) XML
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easier toauthor) XML
• Next by Date: Re: Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easier to author) XML
• Previous by thread: RE: Logical markup Language
• Next by thread: Re: Suggestions for a slightly less verbose (and easierto author) XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread