necessity of html output was RE: [xsl] output method html doesnt work with namespace in source tree

["bryan" <bry@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> > Are there some particular browsers, html implementations, out there
that
> > will choke on <br/> for example?

>Netscape 4.x, if that's a browser in your eyes ;-)

well not really :), but I'm not sure if <br/> will crash in every
Netscape 4.x? 
I suppose this just showed one of my many blind spots, since I tend to
just work with xml to xml cases. When I do work with xml to html it's
still xml to xml, I just use highly structured markup where the need for
<br/> is abrogated or taken up by css control of the presentation, and
tend to take care of stuff like metadata etc. either via dom
manipulation, or to just drop it in favor RDF, i.e. I tend to workaround
the problems, and my tendency to workaround is so ingrained I don't even
realize it's a workaround until one of the nasty legacy problems smacks
me in the head. 

Question: in the experience of people on this list working with less
well known browsers is <br></br> more or less problematic than <br/>?
Yes I realize there is not difference in them as xml, I'm asking is
there a difference in how they affect your browsers as html?

I suppose the main need would be for Forms, which admittedly I am not a
big fan of forms, problems such as <option selected>, can be dealt with
in newer browsers with <option selected="yes"> but I seem to remember
that it's a problem in older browsers, I'd forgotten all about that
particular problem. 

 Brian Martinez mentions that textarea has problems in IE 6, if the
output is meant to be legacy html then textarea should be <textarea>text
inside of textarea here</textarea> anyway, shouldn't it?


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list