[wp-hackers] Any chance of the "Kubrick vs hReview" patch being accepted prior to WP 2.0 release?

[Elliotte Harold]

Phillip Pearson wrote:

> Another plus for using classnames is that you don't need to do any DTD 
> hackery to make your HTML validate with the W3C validator.  Namespaced 
> XML would be nice if the validator ignored namespaced elements, but it 
> doesn't ...

Personally I've never been a big fan of validity. Well-formedness: yes. 
Validity: maybe if doesn't hurt too much or get in my way.

The X in XML and XHTML is supposed to stand for "Extensible". A language 
that only allows a few fixed tag names isn't very extensible.

For what it's worth (not much) it is possible to make non-standard 
extension elements and attributes valid with the appropriate 
modifications to the internal DTD subset. I wrote about this in the 
first couple of editions of XML in a Nutshell. However, it's quite 
painful and doesn't gain you anything in the end. Most of the time 
well-formedness is all I need.

-- 
Elliotte Rusty Harold  elharo at metalab.unc.edu
XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim