> For example, the
> following snippet is a perfectly well-formed and valid HTML document,
> but none of the regexps posted in this thread so far are able to
> correctly parse it:
> 
>   <HTML/
>     <HEAD/
>       <TITLE/>/
>       <P/>
> 
> Oh, and, no, there is nothing missing there (well, except for the
> DOCTYPE declaration, I left that out for brevity -- this snippet is
> valid HTML 2.0, HTML 3.2 and HTML 4.01), that is actually a complete,
> well-formed and valid HTML document.
> 

True, but most web sites are more likely to be malformed than they are 
to be unparsably complex. If a regex will work predictably for one type 
of page on one web site, perhaps a parser might be overkill.

Dan