RE: XHTML validation

Christian Smith:

> > Well, they are well-formed (I believe). The second one should be
> > valid too, although it's hard to be sure, since there are no
> > validators to check them with.

> Manually check the file against the XHTML DTD. You'll see that the FORM
> element takes form.content as it content.

Oh, oh. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!

I'm glad some of this nonsense is my own doing. A least when it's my head 
that is broken I can start doing something about it.

As it turns out now, both the WDG HTML Validator and the validator at 
XHTML Validator 0.9 are OK, so I can very happily retract a lot of what 
I've said on this matter.

But the W3C validator is still talking nonsense.

Thank's for all the reactions. When I asked about this before there
was just a thundering silence.

#####################################################################
                          Bertilo Wennergren
                  <http://purl.oclc.org/net/bertilo>
                      <bertilow@hem.passagen.se>
#####################################################################