[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Rick has it right. When the decision to
make a Draconian Parse the centerpiece of XML
to support a well-formed core, one remark made
by the a supporter was that this would ensure the
clean up of malformed HTML. A counter argument was
that that approach sounded good but that practical
programmers would still handle the errors and
go on because that is what customers would want.
In hindsight, the counter argument has so far
been right with regards to HTML.
But clean up of legacy HTML is not the reason to
use XML anyway and the Draconian Parse is
the one way a well-formed system can actually
work. Don't expect IE to be rewritten to
support only Draconian apps. Today, IE allows
<HTML xmlns:mytree>
and while I can live with that, it seems to suggest
that attention to details of Draconian XML is a
ways off. Sounds Good Maybe Later applies to
a lot of efforts that get momentum.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Kennedy [mailto:xml-dev@xhaus.com]
So getting back to the FUD story about NOT being xhtml
compliant .........
Or maybe I'm just too cynical ;-)
Regards,
Alan Kennedy.
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using WebMail by CyberGate.
http://www.gate.net/webmail
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
