Don't worry, you're not. :-) - Stig
On Sat, 2002-04-27 at 03:44, Zeev Suraski wrote: > Yes, but I thought it was SGML compliant (as in, some sort of a subset of > SGML with lots of predefined rules, but still, falls into the SGML language > category). > > But then, I could very well be wrong about this. > > Zeev > > At 05:37 27/04/2002, Andrew Lindeman wrote: > >I'm pretty sure XML is a scaled down and easier to learn/work with version of > >SGML. > > > >Correct me if I'm wrong > > > >--Andrew > > > >On Friday 26 April 2002 07:30 pm, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > At 03:18 27/04/2002, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > > >It looks like we can. I was assuming the SGML characteristics for XML and > > > >it looks like I was wrong. A '>' is ok inside the <?php ?> tags. > > > > > > Ok, so that's actually useful. But it sounds odd - XML is not SGML > > > compliant? > > > > > > Zeev > > > >-- > >"We all know Linux is great...it does infinite loops in 5 seconds." > >(Linus Torvalds about the superiority of Linux on the Amterdam > >Linux Symposium) > > > -- > PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php