News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Google HTML/CSS style guide suggests omitting head and body tags.

Re:Google HTML/CSS style guide suggests omitting head and bo... by ravenstine on Tuesday May 21, 2019 @12:12PM (#19971552)
Aren't there lots of scripts that depend on the head, body, and even html tags? The HTML tag in particular is used for a lot of feature detection, and the body is used as the root element for a lot of SPAs.

That's not to say that abolishing those tags isn't a great idea, but it would be harder than it looks for projects with an appreciable number of dependencies. I'm definitely in support of never writing that stupid <html> tag again.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google HTML/CSS style guide suggests omitting head and bo... by alexhutcheson on Tuesday May 21, 2019 @12:13PM (#19971568)
I think those elements still end up in the DOM regardless of whether you type them out explicitly. I might be mid-remembering though.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google HTML/CSS style guide suggests omitting head and bo... by butz on Tuesday May 21, 2019 @12:18PM (#19971622)
You are correct. Browser fills in missing tags, closes elements, etc. Try opening blank page in any browser and inspect it: you'll find html, head and body tags already placed in DOM.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google HTML/CSS style guide suggests omitting head and bo... by ravenstine on Tuesday May 21, 2019 @12:23PM (#19971665)
Ah yes, you're right. I forget a lot of those browser behaviors that haven't much consequence on my work.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google HTML/CSS style guide suggests omitting head and bo... by edflsafoiewq on Tuesday May 21, 2019 @12:26PM (#19971690)
There's a difference between a tag, which is a bit of concrete syntax like "<b>" or "</html>", and an element, which is basically a node in the DOM.
[ Parent | on HN ]