Doc bug?

[John La Rooy]

Peter Hansen wrote:

> Steve Holden wrote:
>
> >The htmllib 2.2 docs say """See Also:
> >Module HTMLParser:
> >Alternate HTML parser that offers a slightly lower-level view of the 
> input,
> >but is designed to work with XHTML, and does not implement some of 
> the SGML
> >syntax not used in ``HTML as deployed'' and which isn't legal for XHTML.
> >"""
>
>
> Ouch.  I'd offer a rewrite if I understood what that meant, but I don't,
> so I can't.
>
> "does not implement some of the syntax not used in X and which isn't Y"
>       ^^^                              ^^^                     ^^^^^
>
> Double negatives are generally hard to read.  In this case, I'm not
> sure if that's a double, triple, or what.
>
> -Peter

It more or less means that it works with XHTML which includes the 'HTML' 
that 'everyone' is using. However it is possible to write valid HTML 
that will not work with it.

John