This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 12578 - The note says: "Omitting an element's start tag does not mean the element is not present; it is implied, but it is still there." 1.) Before the word "start tag" should be an "optional", because in many (or all) other cases omitting the start tag results i
Summary: The note says: "Omitting an element's start tag does not mean the element is ...
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: LC1 HTML5 spec (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-05-01 12:28 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2011-08-04 05:16 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2011-05-01 12:28:51 UTC 
Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/syntax.html
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#optional-tags

Comment:
The note says: "Omitting an element's start tag does not mean the element is
not present; it is implied, but it is still there." 1.) Before the word "start
tag" should be an "optional", because in many (or all) other cases omitting
the start tag results in an element not being present even if the appropriate
end tag is present. 2.) Before the word "implied" should be an "only", because
the critical information is not that an element exist *although* it is
implied, but that an element exists even if it is *only* implied.

Posted from: 92.225.90.210
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.21.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.5 Safari/533.21.1
Comment 1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-07-28 01:23:20 UTC 
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Partially Accepted
Change Description: see diff given below
Rationale: I'm not sure I agree with #2. I don't really understand what "only" would mean there. With #1, "optional" doesn't seem to be defined in this context, and so doesn't help any more than "omit". I tried to clarify it though.
Comment 2 contributor 2011-07-28 01:23:39 UTC 
Checked in as WHATWG revision r6335.
Check-in comment: clarification
http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=6334&to=6335
Comment 3 Michael[tm] Smith 2011-08-04 05:16:23 UTC 
mass-move component to LC1