Asbjørn Ulsberg wrote:
But is it possible to check the wellformedness of the markup inside
atom:content and suggest that the authors use 'type="xhtml"' instead of
'type="html"' if it is indeed wellformed X(HT)ML? It's a real stretch in
terms of how far the validator should go, but I can definately see its
usefulness.
-1
Just because a feed appears to contain well-formed xhtml content today, that
doesn't mean it's going to be well-formed tomorrow. Encouraging people to
use xhtml when they don't know enough to have made that decision themselves
is just asking for trouble. Sooner or later they're going to end up with
broken xml which will be completely unreadable in many aggregators.
Also, escaped html tends to be better supported by aggregators anyway.
Regards
James
