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

Bug+Fix for user-defined inline tags and inline propagation

From: Randy Waki <rwaki@flipdog.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 18:38:31 -0700
To: <dsr@w3.org>, <html-tidy@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001f01c06bb7$e443f520$b665a8c0@rwaki>
4-Aug-2000 Tidy creates duplicates of enclosing inline emphasis tags
inside of user-defined inline tags.  This isn't what we were expecting.
I thought it was just us, but apparently not:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/html-tidy/2000OctDec/0215.html
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/html-tidy/2000OctDec/0342.html
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/html-tidy/2000JulSep/0266.html

I had changed our internal copy of Tidy to suppress the "extra" inline
emphasis tags.  Now that I realize it's not just us, I'd like to ask
Dave to consider incorporating this change into the mainline Tidy.  I
don't know if there are instances where the inline emphasis propagation
is desirable, but at least now we have three instances where it is
undesirable.

NOTE: This change requires the CM_MIXED bug fix I recently submitted:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/html-tidy/2000OctDec/0315.html

Assuming that bug fix is in place, the following change suppresses the
"extra" inline emphasis tags:


--- tags.c	Fri Jul 07 17:55:14 2000
+++ \temp\tags.c	Thu Dec 21 16:11:58 2000
@@ -323,7 +323,7 @@
 
 void DefineInlineTag(char *name)
 {
-    install(name, VERS_PROPRIETARY, (CM_INLINE|CM_NO_INDENT|CM_NEW), ParseBlock, null);
+    install(name, VERS_PROPRIETARY, (CM_INLINE|CM_NO_INDENT|CM_NEW|CM_MIXED), ParseBlock, null);
 }
 
 void DefineBlockTag(char *name)
Received on Thursday, 21 December 2000 20:40:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 April 2012 06:13:45 GMT