"Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort (AT) interxnl (DOT) net> wrote in
news:Xns9425789664B78eejj99 (AT) 194 (DOT) 109.133.29:
Quote:
Johannes Koch wrote on 31 okt 2003 in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:
E.g. ol elements cannot contains script elements.
What part is invalid, the qwerty?
You know how to validate HTML? Hint: <http://validator.w3.org/
Yes, if that is your definition of "invalid" then you are right. |
When talking about HTML, "valid" and "invalid" are technical terms with
precise meanings. They're not subject to personal definitions. A valid
HTML document is one whose syntax conforms to the document type definition
(DTD) associated with its document type. An invalid HTML document is one
whose syntax doesn't conform. The question of whether or not the syntax
conforms is one that can be answered algorithmically, i.e. by a purely
mechanical process. Calling an HTML document "valid" or "invalid" is a
statement of fact, not a value judgment. People can hold differing
opinions on whether or not it's important for a document to be valid, but
not on whether or not a document *is* valid.