W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2008

Re: Comments on HTML WG face to face meetings in France Oct 08

From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:49:51 -0800
Message-ID: <491DF27F.3020507@metalab.unc.edu>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org

Boris Zbarsky wrote:

> Try loading that in your favorite browsers and seeing what happens. Note 
> that some of them display some bold text, while others do not. This is 
> because the XML specification _does_ say that this document is invalid 
> (that is not XML)

Can I ask that we be very careful in our language here? Invalid 
documents can indeed be correct XML. A malformed document is not XML, 
but an invalid document is XML. If it's not XML, then the XML definition 
of validity can't even be applied. That distinction is really critical 
to this discussion.

-- 
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@metalab.unc.edu
Received on Friday, 14 November 2008 21:50:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:08 GMT