← Back to context

Comment by maratc

1 day ago

Just to remind you that <bold> <italic> text </bold> </italic> [0] that has been working for ages in every browser ever, is NOT a valid XHTML, and should be rejected by GP's proposal.

I, for one, is kinda happy that XHTML is dead.

[0]: By <bold> I mean <b> and by <italic> I mean <i>, and the reason it's not valid HTML is that the order of closing is not reverse of the order of opening as it should properly be.

10 comments

maratc

Reply
JimDabell  1 day ago

That caused plenty of incompatibilities in the past. At one point, Internet Explorer would parse that and end up with something that wasn’t even a tree.

HTML is not a set of instructions that you follow. It’s a terrible format if you treat it that way.

reactordev  1 day ago

It’s totally valid XHTML, just not recognized.

XHTML allows you to use XML and <bold> <italic> are just XML nodes with no schema. The correct form has been and will always be <b> and <i>. Since the beginning.

  • yoz-y  1 day ago

    The problem there is the order of tags not their names.

    • reactordev  1 day ago

      Ooooo… now we’re talking. Sloppy HTML that closes a tag out of order or just declared out of order? Or rendering bugs when bold is before italic? It’s why XHTML should have been standard. Just dump, error out, make the developer fix it.

      3 replies →