In article <3d344827@news.povray.org>,
 "Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:

>In article <jer### [at] netplexaussieorg> , Jerry 
><jer### [at] acusdedu>  wrote:
>
>> An anchor needs a closing tag in the same way as <em> and <strong> need
>> closing tags. There isn't any "implied ending" except perhaps at the end
>> of a paragraph-level tag.
>
>But then, why does Mozilla turn it into a *link*, inferring that it has a
>"href" attribute while it does not?  That is a bug!!!  The standard is very

That may or may not be a bug; I'd have to see the original code to know 
for sure; when leaving out required ending tags, behaviour can sometimes 
become undefined, for example. I was commenting only on the claim that 
anchors of the name variety do not have to have ending tags, that they 
have an implied ending tag that makes them empty, and that they have 
exhibited this behaviour from the start. They do need ending tags, and 
they have needed ending tags from the beginning, and in the beginning 
they couldn't be empty.

Jerry
-- 
http://www.hoboes.com/jerry/
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish, and you've
depleted the lake."--It Isn't Murder If They're Yankees
(http://www.hoboes.com/jerry/Murder/)

Post a reply to this message