> I like this; how about making it valid xml markup tho'? Or at least a more
> full xml compatable alternative - just as <?php is xml compliant but <? is
> the short version many peopel use.
>
> I think <?mg:#####?/> and <?mg:#####?> are good full alternatives where
> ##### is the junk that does the real stuff.
That does make the tags longer. Ah well.
> This is important if we (and I do) want to be able to use the DHTML editor
> or the MSHTML editor to edit articles and fragments such.
A good point. We'll want a syntax that both requires minimal change to the
PHP scanner/lexer and is xml-friendly.
Does xml require the declaration after the '?' ?
Emile
--
This is The Midgard Project's mailing list. For more information,
please visit the project's web site at http://www.midgard-project.org
To unsubscribe the list, send an empty email message to address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
