I suspect that if the type is left off it assumes that it's javascript. nice templating engine
On 15 July, 12:02, Brett Ritter <swift...@swiftone.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Karl Swedberg<k...@englishrules.com> wrote: > > Interesting view about this from Douglas Crockford: > ... > > language in all browsers has been JavaScript. In XHTML, this attribute is > > required and unnecessary. In HTML, it is better to leave it out. The browser > > knows what to do. > > That is interesting. I wonder why it is "better" to leave it out, > even if the default works? As a general rule I always thought there > is nothing wrong with explicit, particularly if it is non-onerous, and > even more so on something regularly changing, such as Web practices. > > And how would this interact with Resig's advice to use unknown script > types to stick content into the page that would not be > displayed/read/used/etc by default? I just discovered that trick and > was hoping that would provide me the final solution to not including a > lot of markup in my JS. > > http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-micro-templating/ > > -- > Brett Ritter / SwiftOne > swift...@swiftone.org
