RE: If XML is too hard for a programmer, perhaps he'd b e
> That the application is dumb to expect exclusively text, with no > provision for markup. OK > >Even more importantly, do you *really* want your <b></b> tags to be > >hanging out with no namespace? What will you do when your "markup" > >contains something like "<p><br>"? > > Well, actually, that's precisely how we write the stories on > xmlhack.com, and there's this little bit of code that checks your markup > for well-formedness when you enter it. This isn't rocket science. On the one hand you have no problem using some hackish version of HTML that is neither XHTML nor HTML 4.0; yet you consider it an unacceptable hack to use CDATA. This is the irony that puzzled me at first. I suppose I understand why you are doing it, though, and agree that tools do a bad job of supporting scenarios where you want to enter the raw markup directly (rather than text). On the other hand, *some* tools aren't even smart enough to escape markup symbols that creep into text fields, and that's even more annoying.
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