Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Manfred Lotz <manfred.lotz@arcor.de>
Newsgroups: comp.text.xml
Subject: Re: > or &gt;
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:41:13 +0100
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <20170131174113.39dcff2b@arcor.com>
References: <20170130213323.44a3c525@arcor.com> <o6o9u2$2cid$1@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net ji+KJKXCqd5lo5paki7yfwfks6arYBRWR8WfQU7YrDPluYZ9DW
X-Orig-Path: news.bsd.localnet!not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:eS7vKxWGN/1RhG+RS471yc8PA9k=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
Xref: csiph.com comp.text.xml:879

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 21:07:14 +0000 (UTC)
richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) wrote:

> In article <20170130213323.44a3c525@arcor.com>,
> Manfred Lotz  <manfred.lotz@arcor.de> wrote:
> >Hi there, 
> >Let us assume I have the following document t.xml
> >
> ><?xml version="1.0"  encoding="utf-8"?>
> ><entry>
> >   bla --> more bla
> ></entry>
> >
> >
> >Running xmllint t.xml gives a "corrected' output with &gt;. instead
> >of  
> >>.  
> >
> >However, xmllint doesn't return a non zero return code which means
> >(if I understand xmllint correctly) that from xmllint's point of view
> >the document is well formed.
> >
> >Question: Is the above document really well formed? Or is it required
> >to have &gt; instead of '>'?  
> 
> It's well formed.
> 

Thanks. I thought it is but wasn't 100% sure.

> There is one circumstance in which you must use &gt; (or a character
> reference) instead of >, and that's when it's part of the sequence ]]>
> and that sequence is not marking the end of a CDATA section.  You're
> unlikely to run into this in real life, but many programs always
> output &gt; anyway.
> 

Yes, that's an unlikely case in "normal life".

Thanks again, Manfred