On 8/31/06, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I assume this is from an XHTML standpoint (meaning the result isn't a one-to-one HTML > XHTML ~equivalent) and not an well formed XML standpoint? Not that it really matters all that much as if the result isn't a solid representation of the authors original intent, then theres really no other alternative than to escape it and tag it as HTML.
In short, unless the above is incorrect, then both Anthony and the FeedValidator are doing all that they both can and should be doing.
Is this a fair statement?
Also, there are a number of tools that attempt to produce well-formed
XHTML, but don't do so consistently enough to drop the content into an
Atom feed in such a manner.
I assume this is from an XHTML standpoint (meaning the result isn't a one-to-one HTML > XHTML ~equivalent) and not an well formed XML standpoint? Not that it really matters all that much as if the result isn't a solid representation of the authors original intent, then theres really no other alternative than to escape it and tag it as HTML.
In short, unless the above is incorrect, then both Anthony and the FeedValidator are doing all that they both can and should be doing.
Is this a fair statement?
--
/M:D
M. David Peterson
http://mdavid.name | http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/2354
