Comment by 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.
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.
The problem there is the order of tags not their names.
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.
But the problem here is that our nice programmer-brained mental model does not match the actual requirements of text.
Unless you know about tree structures, it doesn’t make sense to the average person why you would have to stop and then restart a span of formatting options just because an unrelated attribute changed.
And that’s why XHTML failed - HTML is human-writable.
3 replies →
I've edited my comment to better present the issue.
Out of order closure should definitely error out with an “unclosed italic tag detected at line:…” error.
> It’s totally valid XHTML, just not recognized.
Am I right in assuming that even you didn't notice the problem the first time you looked at it?
> Out of order closure should definitely error out
Hitchens's razor: "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."