Re: Word and XML (was: XML standards coherency and so forth)
John Cowan wrote: >> <P>This is <B>a test <I>of the</B> emergency</I> broadcast >> system</P> > Un*censored*believable. This not only isn't XML, it isn't even > HTML. What were they thinking of? [. . .] I agree that this is bad. Unfortunately, a lot of companies (and some that really *do* know better) are still creating and selling products that generate invalid HTML (SGML). For one example: 'URL's of the kind: <a href="http://foo.bar.com/search?&status=clear&PageCall=1&mode=on"> viz., unescaped ampersand in attribute values, which is simply illegal. So long as software companies across the board will tolerate an attitude of "close is good enough" - what should we expect? Come to think of it: why should this be "Un*censored*believable" given that 99% of Net stuff is illegal HTML, despite a couple generations (years) of HTML DTDs? -rcc xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format