RE: RE: Stupid Question (was RE: XMLdoesn'tdese rve
On Tue, 2002-03-05 at 16:05, John Evdemon wrote: > On Tuesday, March 05, 2002 5:03 PM, Simon St.Laurent wrote: > > > > Also, saying "show me this information as well-formed XML" is a pretty > > good way to assess how deeply complicated all the hidden bits are. > > > Isn't the phrase well-formed XML a bit redundant? Sure, though I think it's acquired a meaning slightly stronger than simply "XML". I could have said "just XML with no schemas, DTDs, or other magic", but I think "well-formed XML" both says it better and suggests that the notion of well-formedness (as a category separate from validity) is important. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
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