João Abecasis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Joel de Guzman wrote: >> so, it's choking at the empty end tag: </> >> If I apply Joao's workaround, then everything's just fine. >> Is "</>" valid XML? I assumed it is. Anyway, it seems that >> the XML parser indeed is the one getting confused; not Quickbook. > > Looking at w3.org for the XML specifications (both 1.0 and 1.1, > QuickBook outputs 1.0), it seems that using "</>" as an end tag is, > indeed, NOT valid XML. You cannot skip the name in the end tag. So the > workaround really is the correct fix in this case.
Really! Someone told me that you could, and I thought to myself, "that's the one redeeming feature in the XML syntax." :( -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Boost-docs mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
