Right, the "self-closing elements" don't actually bother me. I do slightly prefer the <foo /> form, but in general I don't care. What used to baffle me was I couldn't do a "<div />" as that wasn't allowed. And I couldn't think of a good reason to care on that. (It seemed you had to go out of your way to disallow that, for no apparent reason.)
The tag inference, I just don't get. I can /almost/ understand the example you used, but the examples include crap like:
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<tr>
Where the second "<tr>" is actually part of the inferred "<tbody>". Just, why?
Edit: And to be perfectly clear, I do expect most of this to be handled for me by whatever framework I'm using nowdays. And, I don't actually generate documents directly that much. For docs, I typically go with LaTeX or friends. (Honestly, probably org-mode moreso, but even that is light nowdays.)
Well, in my paper, like you, I'm criticizing (tag omission in) HTML5's table content models, and discourage aggressive use of it ([1]), so probably I'm not the one to defend it ;)
Even the HTML specification text itself got its tables wrong ([2]; also explained in [1]).
Apologies, I did not mean for you to be on a defensive. Just adding to the point. If anyone skipped your link, they shouldn't have. Thanks for sharing!
The tag inference, I just don't get. I can /almost/ understand the example you used, but the examples include crap like:
Where the second "<tr>" is actually part of the inferred "<tbody>". Just, why?Edit: And to be perfectly clear, I do expect most of this to be handled for me by whatever framework I'm using nowdays. And, I don't actually generate documents directly that much. For docs, I typically go with LaTeX or friends. (Honestly, probably org-mode moreso, but even that is light nowdays.)