- From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:38:19 +0100
- To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- cc: www-html@w3.org
David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>Well I'll be darn'ed. I never thought this would work > >It's well formed, but I'm not sure that it is valid. Pardon? Since the Validator no longer performs well-formedness checking without also Validating, that would mean this is a bug in the Validator. What exactly makes you think that this is not Valid? >Valid XHTML depends on obeying rules that can't be specified in >DTDs. Sure. Which rule in particular comes into effect here? >You can't of course, represent a CDATA section in this way, YM a CDATA section inside a CDATA section? >and you will still have gone through a translation from transfer >character set to UCS-4 and from UCS-4 to the display font encoding. The relevance being? -- > I suggest you attend some sort of anger management class.... That's where you learn to upset the PHBs? -- Peter da Silva
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2002 16:38:44 UTC