W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > October to December 2000

Re: possible jtidy changes

From: Sami Lempinen <lempinen@iki.fi>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 08:34:31 +0200
To: "Gregory C. Schohn" <gcs@eizel.com>
Cc: html-tidy@w3.org
Message-ID: <20001116083431.C802@koti1-user114.adsl.tpo.fi>
Greetings,

I am cc'ing your message to the html-tidy list in order to discuss
this in relation to the C version. New features should be implemented
in the C version first and then ported to JTidy to keep the two
versions in sync.

Could a Tidy user (C version) please verify that this problem is
present there also? If yes, should it be altered?

Thanks!

-Sami

On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 12:05:12PM -0500, Gregory C. Schohn wrote:
> hi, we're using tidy here to kosherize webpages into xml & we're having
> a problem w/ script tags.  I'm willing to make patches for them, provided
> that they'd make it into the source tree (so that we don't need to worry
> about maintenance).
> 
> I haven't looked at the source yet (not really), but here are the
> problems.  The first is the script tag, when the script is not enclosed
> inside of a comment (example: www.cnn.com/index.html - function "email").
> After running tidy (w/ a couple of different configurations) the function
> gets excised from the script node & the text is placed immediately after
> the end tag.  As far as I can tell on limited cases, scripts are always
> excised when the bodies are not enclosed w/in comments.  I'd like to fix
> that (I would think that a proper way to handle it would be to find
> <script> & </script> and place _everything_ in between under a script
> element).
> 
> Please let me know if this would be  a worthwhile addition & if there are
> any particular ways that I should go about making it (& how the C version
> fits in, I'd rather not make 2 changes, but I could).
> 
> thanks,
> Greg

-- 
lempinen@iki.fi http://www.iki.fi/lempinen/
ICQ:19002710  *************  apt-get a life
Received on Thursday, 16 November 2000 01:34:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 April 2012 06:13:44 GMT