- From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:43:56 +0200
- To: Jasper Bryant-Greene <jasper@bryant-greene.name>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Jasper Bryant-Greene wrote: >They're not really processing instructions, they just look like them so >that editors and the like don't get confused. > >Whether you write it like that (which is inefficient anyway, because it >drops in and out of PHP parsing mode) or just echo the whole tag, it's >still invalid XML because it doesn't follow the correct processing >instruction attr="val" structure like (<?xml version="1.0" >encoding="utf-8"?>) > > There is no such requirement in XML that says the contents of a processing instruction have to be of attr="val" form... [16] PI ::= '<?' PITarget (S (Char* - (Char* '?>' Char*)))? '?>' http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-pi I think it’s perfectly possible to use <?php ?> in a way that is legal to XML processors, as long as you don’t use it in attributes and avoid writing down the ‘?>’ sequence except when exiting the processing instruction (e.g. the echo then has to be echo '?'.'>', or using an escape code for the ? or the >). But the PHP parser also accepts it in places not legal to XML. By the way, why is ‘dagobah1’ asking this on www-html and not on public-xml-core-wg or something? (although that one seems to miss a subscribe link in the W3C mailinglists overview). ~Grauw -- Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.
Received on Friday, 24 June 2005 10:43:56 UTC