I don’t know what they have in mind, but I do know that’s the first time I’ve seen an empty <body /> tag.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, April 14th, 2002 at 3:59 pm and is filed under junk drawer.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the post feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Interestingly, the validator doesn’t seem to think that <body /> is a problem. I would have said that the content model (%block;|SCRIPT)+ meant that you have to have at least one block-level or script element in the body, but if it’s good enough for the validator…
Starting to remind me of one of my favorite Dilberts, with Wally saying ”Of all the pleasures of life, I like nitpicking the best”, but it’s true, I do.
Since the page is 4.01 Transitional, not XHTML, that’s not an empty, closed tag. Just like <br /> in 4.01, it’s a tag with an unknown attribute ”/”. The reason it’s valid must be because both <body> and </body> are listed as optional: the validator doesn’t mind
Ya know, you can always tell when you have crossed the line into the geek realm when you see ”I don’t know what they have in mind, but I do know that’s the first time I’ve seen an empty <body /> tag.” and it makes you laugh like an idiot for 15 minutes.
Ladies and gentlemen, your newest geek, the Reverend !
i know i know!
hehe. I talked with meg about it last week, and no it wont be bad for Ev in any way.
Rats. I had my hopes up.
i love code that makes me laugh. like that, or sites designed with dreamweaver, so on…
Interestingly, the validator doesn’t seem to think that <body /> is a problem. I would have said that the content model (%block;|SCRIPT)+ meant that you have to have at least one block-level or script element in the body, but if it’s good enough for the validator…
<body /> should be a valid tag, no? I mean it closes itself, thats all the validator cares, i think.
but!
I am tired, so i could be completely wrong.
Starting to remind me of one of my favorite Dilberts, with Wally saying ”Of all the pleasures of life, I like nitpicking the best”, but it’s true, I do.
Since the page is 4.01 Transitional, not XHTML, that’s not an empty, closed tag. Just like <br /> in 4.01, it’s a tag with an unknown attribute ”/”. The reason it’s valid must be because both <body> and </body> are listed as optional: the validator doesn’t mind
…
<body>
<p>Not much here.</p>
</html>
either. Blerg. That’s seriously ugly valid HTML.
Ya know, you can always tell when you have crossed the line into the geek realm when you see ”I don’t know what they have in mind, but I do know that’s the first time I’ve seen an empty <body /> tag.” and it makes you laugh like an idiot for 15 minutes.
Ladies and gentlemen, your newest geek, the Reverend !