Regarding interoperability with XML 1.0 and 1.1 for XML5 - comments containing > chars in the middle are valid in XML 1.0 and 1.1. So the change introduced in 2caadd3 may cause break on those.
This example is in both XML 1.0 and 1.1 spec, as a valid comment:
<!-- declarations for <head> & <body> -->
Was error on > character in comment introduced to overcome some class of bugs?
Regarding interoperability with XML 1.0 and 1.1 for XML5 - comments containing
>chars in the middle are valid in XML 1.0 and 1.1. So the change introduced in 2caadd3 may cause break on those.This example is in both XML 1.0 and 1.1 spec, as a valid comment:
<!-- declarations for <head> & <body> -->Was error on
>character in comment introduced to overcome some class of bugs?