Re: [PHP] Re: sloppiness & stupidity

On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 18:59 -0400, tedd wrote:
> At 10:51 PM +0100 6/17/09, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> >On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 23:05 +0200, Nisse Engström wrote:
> >>  On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:18:09 +0100, "Ford, Mike" wrote:
> >>
> >>  > This is very true -- but XHTML requires *all* attributes to have a
> >>  > value, so an XHTML conformant page will use <select multiple="multiple"
> >>  > name="selector"> (or something similar such as <select multiple="yes"
> >>  > name="selector">). The only inconsistency here is that different people
> >>  > have chosen to validate against different standards.
> >>
> >>  The multiple attribute only has one value: "multiple", so
> >>  it has to be <select multiple="multiple">. I don't think
> >>  "yes" cuts the mustard. In HTML, you can shorten it to
> >>  <select multiple>.
> >>
> >>
> >>  /Nisse
> >>
> >I read somewhere that the XHTML standards say that for all attributes
> >that would normally be standalone in HTML, they should be given a value
> >that is the same as the attribute name, so you would use
> >multiple="multiple", selected="selected", checked="checked", etc. As far
> >as I know, using this in regular HTML won't cause it to choke either, as
> >the parsers tend to only look at the existence of the attributes, not
> >the values they may or may not have.
> >
> >Thanks
> >Ash
> 
> 
> Ash:
> 
> As I understand it and is my experience, that is 
> true -- a stand-alone HTML attribute should be 
> equal to itself, such as selected="selected", or 
> more specifically selected="SELECTED". However, 
> it will still work but will throw a validation 
> error/warning in some DOCTYPEs, such as XHTLM. I 
> don't know of any other DOCTYPE that might throw 
> such as error.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> tedd
> 
> -- 
> -------
> http://sperling.com  http://ancientstones.com  http://earthstones.com
> 
I was under the impression that in XHTML *all* attributes had to have
values, even if just empty strings?

Thanks
Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk