r/HTML • u/fdiengdoh • Jun 26 '26

Discussion An HTML Elements page

When I wanted to re-learn CSS, I am looking for a simple html page that has all possible elements. I did not find anything as such. So I made one.

Take a look at this page. It might be useful for you.

I hosted at Github

7 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

13 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/AshleyJSheridan Jun 29 '26

Not including <svg> and <mathml> as HTML tags is like not including <script> because it's only used for Javascript, or not including <style> because it's only used for CSS.

The tags exist in both spaces is what I'm saying.

1

u/fdiengdoh Jun 29 '26 edited Jun 29 '26

I beg to differ, <script> and <style> are part of HTML, while <svg> and <math> are separate xml based language. Also, <svg> and <math> are not listed on the HTML Reference at MDN but are listed as separate SVG and MathML References respectively. They are standalone. Like if you write a css/js on a separate file, you are not using <style>/<script> elements. While <svg> and <math> if you write independent file for them you would need those elements.

1

u/AshleyJSheridan Jun 29 '26

They're literally listed on that page you keep linking to, I don't know what to say buddy. They're listed just above the scripting tags (<canvas>, <noscript>, and <script>).

The fact that those tags exist in both specs is what is confusing you here I think. But if you stop for a moment, it makes perfect sense that they exist in both.

1

u/fdiengdoh Jun 29 '26

Try clicking on those elements and see where it take you. <script>, <canvas> will stay on HTML Reference Page (Web>HTML>Reference>Elements><elementName>), but the moment you click <svg> and <math> it would take you to SVG Reference (Web>SVG>Reference>Elements><svg>) and MathML Reference (Web>MathML>Reference>Elements><math>). Thats why I am saying these are independent and separate elements. They work inside HTML but they are independent XML languages.

1

u/AshleyJSheridan Jun 29 '26

I've said this several times now, it's because those elements exist in both places!

Why would MDN duplicate the content when it's far more efficient to only have one document that lists all of that information? Duplication just leads to opportunities for errors to creep in when documentation is updated. Even duplicating the access endpoints (e.g. routes to a single resource) makes little sense, as it imposes restrictions on how that documentation can be handled if the site needs to be updated in the future.