&lt;br&gt; vs &lt;br /&gt;

vs

acidbox

could someone tell me what the difference is between and ?

I have always used , but i notice that a lot of people user . They both seem to work, but what is the difference?

mikesgt2

is XHTML
 is not

On todays browsers it makes no difference... but the guys at W3 have said it would be a good idea. Anyone know why?

the_Igel

If not only , but all the page is valid xhtml, then you can parse it with different xml parsers. In case you do not bother to validate as xhtml, no need using .

superwormy

You should use XHTML complaint code ( ie , <img src="crap.jpg" /> ) if you'd like to maintain compatible with future browsers, and if you'd like to be nice to whoever is going to have to maintain the pages you build.

Otherwise, use regular HTML ( ).

But for the record, XHTML is basically a stricter standard for what HTML now. XHTML works to solve all the crap problems that should never have popped up in HTML to begin with.

Basically the only major diff. between XHTML and HTML ( as I understand it, correct me if I"m wrong ) are the following:

Every open tag has to have an ending tag OR end in /> ( hence the , but you could also do )

All elements of a tag must be surround in quotes ( ie not more <img height=100 src=crap.jpg>do <img height="100" src="crap.php" /> inestead )

Must maintain good nesting practices ( ie this is bad nesting: <tr><td>stuff</tr></td> )

MrAlaska

Originally posted by superwormy
Basically the only major diff. between XHTML and HTML ( as I understand it, correct me if I"m wrong ) are the following:

The only one I see that you missed is case sensitivity.
</TAG> does not close <tag>

I don't think so, anyway. Correct me if I am wrong 😃

the_Igel

Originally posted by superwormy
You should use XHTML complaint code ( ie , <img src="crap.jpg" /> ) if you'd like to maintain compatible with future browsers, and if you'd like to be nice to whoever is going to have to maintain the pages you build.
<cut>
Must maintain good nesting practices ( ie this is bad nesting: <tr><td>stuff</tr></td> )

In my opinion, point of using xhtml isn't about forward-compatibility, because it's evident that for any reasonable amount of time in future all the xhtml browsers will support good old html. The point is to make the page accessible for xml browsers and, generally, applications of any kind.

That bad nesting you wrote isn't legal in html, too. The difference in xhtml is that you should close all the tags: say in html the following is legal, but not in xhtml:

<p> some text here....
<p> here some more: bla-bla-bla.

In xhtml closing are mandatory.

MrAlaska

Does anybody HTML/XHTML friendly way to insert comments in HTML? There is no way I know of to close the  tag.

[EDIT] I was mistaken, it is supported and does not need closing. unecessary drivel deleted[/EDIT]

the_Igel

Originally posted by MrAlaska
There is no way I know of to close the  tag.

What do you mean? It's legal form for comment in html znd xml as well. What else do you need?

MrAlaska

It was my understanding that the comment tag was not compliant with XML/XHTML but I was unable to find it documented. If it is XML compliant, then I have no problem.

[EDIT] Cool beans, it IS supported, I was just looking in the wrong places. Thank you!

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#dt-comment

the_Igel

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#sec-comments
here it goes.

the_Igel

Originally posted by MrAlaska
It was my understanding that the comment tag was not compliant with XML

Yo be more precise, comment isn't tag at all. So it isn't a subject to closing. 🙂

MrAlaska

lol we were typing at the same time it appears. I stand corrected, and happily so.