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 14512 - closing meta
Summary: closing meta
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: Validator
Classification: Unclassified
Component: check (show other bugs)
Version: HEAD
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: This bug has no owner yet - up for the taking
QA Contact: qa-dev tracking
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-10-19 14:25 UTC by Alessandro Ursomando
Modified: 2011-10-20 16:17 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments

Description Alessandro Ursomando 2011-10-19 14:25:13 UTC 
I've not close <meta> tag but no error/warning report!
Comment 1 Ville Skyttä 2011-10-19 17:41:19 UTC 
Sample document or URL to one needed to investigate.
Comment 2 Alessandro Ursomando 2011-10-19 19:57:22 UTC 
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
	<head>
		<title>Saluto</title>
		<meta charset="UTF-8">
	</head>
	<body>
		<p>Ciao Mondo!</p>
	</body>
</html>


The fifth line should be: <meta charset="UTF-8" />
Comment 3 Ville Skyttä 2011-10-20 06:10:26 UTC 
It should not, because this is not a XHTML document.
Comment 4 Alessandro Ursomando 2011-10-20 07:28:25 UTC 
First of all: I'm a computer science teacher and I'm very happy of this chat.

Ok, My document is an HTML 5 document and not an XHTML document but..

1) I know XHTML 2.0 development was interrupted in order to develop HTML 5, is it true?
2) I know HTML 5 Specification hasn't been written yet and so I suppose I have to use XHTML 1.1 and HTML 4.01 old rules. Is it an error?
3) Finally, if you look here (http://www.w3schools.com/html5/tag_br.asp), or here (http://www.w3schools.com/html5/tag_img.asp), or even here (http://www.w3schools.com/html5/tag_meta.asp) you can find multiple examples of the rule that asks for a slash for the empty tag.
Comment 5 Ville Skyttä 2011-10-20 16:17:43 UTC 
I'm sorry you feel that way, but Bugzilla is for reporting bugs and so far there has been no evidence here that would tell me that we're dealing with a bug - there are more appropriate feedback channels for general discussion.  Please leave this bug closed unless you can provide information (with pointers/links to relevant specification(s)) that would confirm what you reported as a bug in the validator.

Regarding W3Schools, I'm personally have no experience with it but there is a continuous stream of discussions on www-validator mailing list where people point out that it is not a reliable source of accurate information.  W3Schools.com is not affiliated with the W3C in any way.
http://www.google.com/search?q=w3c+w3schools+affiliated