Hi!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm fully aware of this "problem", but it's only limited to "missing"
> </p>s. I've tried to get these in, but then several things went
Uhm. If I understood her correctly it's about missing </LI> and not
missing </P>. The validator wouldn't bother with missing </P>, as that
is legal HTML.
> terribly wrong in the resulting layout. This will be fixed once I
> rewrite the whole thing using some XML Perl modules.
What layout should go wrong in what way when missing </P>'s are added?
This _can't_ be. It must be something different. HTML doesn't care for
</P>.
bye, Georg
