225323 - rendering differs between "<a></a>" and "<a/>"

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Core :: DOM: HTML Parser, defect)

Description

[horsti4ever]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 Firebird/0.7
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 Firebird/0.7

Indentation in nested DT DL differs if you use "<a></a>" instead of "<a/>".


Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Load attached zz.html

Actual Results:  
First part should show the buggy output
dt1
    dd1
    dt2
    dd2 wrong indentation

Second part should show correct output:
dt1
    dd1
    dt2
        dd2 expected indentation


This is only the case while specifying the document as xhtml.

Comment 1

[horsti4ever]

Attachment: testcase to reproduce the bug

Comment 2

[Simon Paquet [:sipaq]]

Confirming on 2003-11-10 fb build on WinXP

Comment 3

[Marco Perez [:mpk]]

Attachment: screenshot of testcase in DOM inspector

This screenshot might shed some light on what Mozilla does with the element in
question (<a/>). The testcase validates fine at http://validator.w3.org/ even
though according to the specs "All elements other than those declared in the
DTD as EMPTY must have an end tag" (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#h-4.3).

Comment 4

[Malcolm Rowe]

Attachment: Same testcase as XHTML

Comment 5

[Malcolm Rowe]

Nope, this is INVALID. You're sending an XHTML document as text/html, which you
may only do if it complies to Appendix C, and in this case, it doesn't (see
C.3), and even then it's not generally a good idea -- see
http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml for more information.

In the first testcase, you've got an unclosed <a> tag: in SGML, your <a/> should
actually be parsed as <a>&gt; in tag-soup HTML, it'll probably end up as <a>,
but it's never XML's <a></a>. Take a look at the second testcase (the third
attachment). It's the same as your testcase, but served as
application/xhtml+xml, so it's parsed using the XML parser. The two results are
identical to the 'expected' result.

Comment 6

[Bill Mason]

*** Bug 241594 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7

[Mats Palmgren (inactive)]

*** Bug 279362 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 8

[Erik Fabert]

*** Bug 280018 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 9

[Richard Brodie]

*** Bug 283189 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 10

[Erik Fabert]

*** Bug 294765 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***