Clarification requested for necessity of </A>

eric@spyglass.com (Eric W. Sink)

Mail folder: html-archive
Next message: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Clarification requested for necessity of </A> "
Previous message: roxana@qsun.att.com: ""
Reply: Yuri Rubinsky: "Re: Clarification requested for necessity of </A>"

Date: Wed, 10 Aug 94 13:15:12 EDT
Message-id: <9408101559.AA28332@hook.spyglass.com>
Reply-To: eric@spyglass.com
Originator: html-wg@oclc.org
Sender: html-wg@oclc.org
Precedence: bulk
From: eric@spyglass.com (Eric W. Sink)
To: Multiple recipients of list <html-wg@oclc.org>
Subject: Clarification requested for necessity of </A>
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: HTML Working Group (Private)


Q: Is it <em>ever</em> legal to omit the </A> tag?

It has been asserted that the following is legal HTML:

<H1><A NAME="topofdocument">Welcome to the Top of the Document</H1>

I disagree, and believe that the </A> should always be present.
I checked our document, and it would appear that I am correct.
Anyone care to clarify?

Thanks,


Eric W. Sink, Software Engineer --  eric@spyglass.com 217-355-6000 ext 237
All opinions expressed are mine, and may not be those of my employer.

        Hakuna Patata  (no french fries)