Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmph. What version of the SGML tools are you using? It seems more
>> prone to get confused by non-entity-ized '<' and '>' than what the
>> rest of us are using.
> I'm not totally au fait with the rules of SGML. Does it allow literal
> '<' in text nodes? In most places I looked in our docs we seem to use
> '<' as I would have expected.
It appears to me that the tools will silently take < (and also &)
as literal characters, *if* what follows them happens to not look
too much like a tag or entity :-(. Pretty ugly. The particular
cases that were biting Devrim seemed to all be occurrences of <>
which perhaps is an allowed tag in his release.
I found out that -wxml will cause openjade to warn about these cases.
It turns on a boatload of other warnings that we probably don't care
about, so I'm not going to recommend using it by default, but it
enabled me to find a lot of problem spots just now.
Oh, another interesting behavior that was turned up by this ---
apparently you can get away with leaving off the ";" in "<",
because we had done so in a few places. -wxml catches that too.
regards, tom lane
