Sent by Techwatcher on 11 July 2002 08:08
Good news:
At 8:49 AM -0700 7/10/02, Mark Newhouse wrote:
>> <answer style="length: short-and-to-the-point;">
>> It is invalid XHTML.
>> </answer>
and Adam Kuehn responded
> And how does one know this in advance, except by running the
> validator?
> This strikes me as a case of a rule that *will* get violated, and
> therefore should be changed.
I guess it was on that [cough] other list when I saw it, but this is a
great page. Sorry I can't take the time right now to figure out its
original URI, and have to do this to you (code from saved page, with <
and > stripped out:
Title:
Allowed nesting of elements in HTML 4 Strict (and XHTML 1.0 Strict)
meta name="description" content="A quick reference to the syntax rules
of the Strict versions of HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0."
link rev="made" [EMAIL-REMOVED]"
base href="http://www.cs.tut.fi/%7Ejkorpela/html/strict.html"
Cheers --
Carol
[EMAIL-REMOVED]
