W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > July to September 2000

RE: tidy4aug00 update

From: Sebastian Lange <lange@cyperfection.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:13:43 +0200
Message-Id: <>
To: "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@jelks.nu>, <html-tidy@w3.org>
Hello Jelks (you're not really from Niue, are you, I mean, it would suck to 
have only one flight weekly and otherwise just the internet to connect with 
the world... hehehe [http://www.niueisland.com/newpage7.htm]),

I am currently implementing this suggestion into my extension to tidy and 
ran into following question:

If "indent-SYSTEM-id: yes", should it look like (a) or like (b)?

         PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<!DOCTYPE html
         PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"


At 13:57 09.08.2000 -0400, Jelks Cabaniss wrote:
>Sebastian Lange wrote:
> > However, I still believe that tidy is wrong about the indentation. While I
> > agree with Jelks that it's easier to read like this and that there is
> > nothing that says it has to be on one line, Tidy should respect the
> > configuration settings and apply them also to the Doctype declaration.
> > This means: if "indent-attributes" is set to "no", the doctype should go on
> > a single line unless "wrap" comes into effect.
>Perhaps something like an "indent-SYSTEM-id" config item could allow you 
>to get
>this granular.  (Remember, the DOCTYPE declaration isn't an element, and the
>PUBLIC and SYSTEM ids aren't attributes.)

Sebastian Lange
Maybe the first chat site that validates as HTML
4.0 even though user input may contain HTML codes.

Courtesy to Dave Raggett's HTML Tidy:

Tidy your documents ONLINE:
Received on Thursday, 10 August 2000 08:17:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:38:48 UTC