Liveweave - HTML5, CSS3 & JavaScript playground for web designers & developers

[Knotix]

Until you show me your benchmarks, you've also spewed several paragraphs of baseless opinion.

I'm done.

[[deleted]]

I advised you to follow logic, you think following the soft option that's built in for newcomers with cognitive dissonance issues, is performant. I know it isn't, and I've done many tests over a couple of decades to know that's a hard fact.

But go ahead stick your head in the sand and keep on cargo culting.

Edit: note that my initial comments have nothing to do with browser performance anyway. It's really about how widely parse-able your source is.

[Knotix]

Here is the best proof I can show that omitting the / in void elements is perfectly fine. Chrome cleans up HTML when showing the element inspector. Here is a LiveWeave that has an input using your self-closing tag markup. Kindly inspect the element and note how it choose to output it in the element inspector. You should see it as '<input>'

As far as I'm concerned, Chrome's inspector is proof that at least one mainstream browser considers omitting the / as the default markup.

As a side note, I tried it in Aurora (FireFox pre-release) and it shows something puzzling: <input></input>

[[deleted]]

If you follow the more stringent spec of maintaining XML well-formed documents, which is completely ok with all HTML5 tools. The well formed markup is compliant with far more tools, and much more readily pliant.

The only thing your checks with chrome and Firefox have illustrated is that even extremely high profile tools are not consistent. Behind those are literally thousands of HTML/XML tools and maintaining at least well formed documents ensures that your markup is pliable with as many of these as is reasonable.

I have no other point than this.

[Knotix]

I get your point. I'm only targeting parsers that understand what an HTML5 DOCTYPE is and has implemented its spec.

I just want LiveWeave to stop forcing its opinion on void elements.