- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 01:21:18 +0100
- To: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- CC: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>, micro xml <public-microxml@w3.org>
On 14/08/2012 01:12, John Cowan wrote: > Fortunately for us, this document is invalid HTML, and as such not > part of the MicroXML use case. non conforming rather than invalid but that's avoiding the main point. If the micro-xml spec doesn't say that micro-xml has to not only look like xml but parse like it then there is nothing to stop people parsing it differently and evidence suggests people _will_ parse it differently. The html examples are just to show that it is simply wrong to assume that the parse tree resulting from syntax that looks like xml is so obviously that produced by an xml parser that it does not need saying. However if you want a conforming (valid) HTML document that is well formed XML then <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <title>x</title> </html> which produces the tree <html> <head><title>x</title></head> <body/> </html> David
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2012 00:21:42 UTC