Quazi Irfan wrote:
Nitin Menon wrote:Was compiling the wrong code.
Using a good IDE can save you from this pain, i.e. IDE will save the source file before compilation, so you know you are using the latest version of the source.
Ulf Dittmer wrote:
Matthew Brown wrote:It's certainly valid XML.
Gotta disagree with that phrasing - "valid" in XML Jargon means "it validates against a schema", be that XSD, DTD or Relax-NG. Since there is no schema in play here, it can't be said to be valid. But it is well-formed, i.e. it conforms to the rules of how XML documents are structured.
Matthew Brown wrote:It's certainly valid XML. Just think of XHTML - it's common to have <div> tags within a <div> tag.
Ulf Dittmer wrote:If you have Java installed, then you have an XML parser installed; check out the JAXP API in the javax.xml package.
No, it is not conventional, if for no other reason than that it is confusing. But it is well-formed XML; validity does not come into play, as there is no schema.
Ulf Dittmer wrote:If it was illegal, shouldn't a parser tell you that real quick? Much quicker, in fact, than waiting for an answer in a forum?