Well-formed and valid

[Frank Boumphrey]

> james anderson <James.Anderson at mecomnet.de> writes:
>
> > > ... it is possible to have a document that is well-formed but
> > > not valid XML 1.0, but still conforms to Namespaces, RDF, or XLink
> > > (though not XHTML, which requires validity for strict conformance).

Well XHTML is no different from any other _document type_.  A document type
such as docbook or XHTML must conform to a DTD or it would not be a document
type!

There is nothing to stop you from using XHTML elements with a namespace in a
hybrid document.

Frank


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)