W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > July to September 2001

RE: join mailing list (was: tidy and scripts. Tell me more)

From: Reitzel, Charlie <CReitzel@arrakisplanet.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:11:27 -0400
Message-ID: <B5C79DDBC655D311B6BD0008C7E64D76013C1832@exchange.arrakisplanet.com>
To: "'Allan Clark'" <allanc@henhouse.chickenandporn.com>, html-tidy@w3.org
Fair question.  According to Dave Raggett, the W3C is planning to change
references from Dave's personal pages
(http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/tidy/) to the SF project home page
(http://tidy.sourceforge.net).   As part of the move, Dave agreed to keep
backup copies of Tidy source on his page.

Dave, has the change been formally approved?  Not that it would change very
much.  Perhaps they are waiting on the first actual release from us.  I
would if I were in their position.

take it easy,
Charles Reitzel

-----Original Message-----
From: Allan Clark [mailto:allanc@henhouse.chickenandporn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 5:03 PM
To: html-tidy@w3.org
Cc: html-tidy@w3.org
Subject: re: join mailing list (was: tidy and scripts. Tell me more)

> At 10:08 AM -0400 9/7/01, Allan Clark wrote:
> >jany.quintard@fr.ibm.com wrote:
> >> ... I am getting results which don't cope with [...]
> >> So, I suppose my tidy is different or I use it the wrong way.
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> By the way, why not include the version or build number in the meta tag
> >> generated by tidy ?
> >I agree with Jany -- provide the version in tidy's meta tag, if only to
> >provide a little more information in the resulting document for
> >debugging situations like this.
> I would agree with you. I originally modified the Tidy code to append the
> name of my platform. The current Tidy code now has this feature. It would
> be easy to append the release date as well. Note, I say "append" so that
> the meta tag is backwards compatible with earlier versions of Tidy - all
> versions look for "HTML Tidy" to see if the tag already exists. However
> currently if the Tidy meta tag already exists, it is never updated - which
> means if your document was originally tidied by Tidy 04 Aug 00 on a
> platform, and now is being updated with a mythical Tidy 01 Jan 02 on a
> Linux platform, the Tidy meta tag would still relect the older version.
> Comments?

Not as useful; it should replace that with its version if indeed is was the
content of the original meta tag.

> >So tidy.sf.net is now the top-of-tree source for tidy?
> Yes. Since no official releases have been announced yet, Dave Raggett's
> site has not changed, and so unless you are in the know (an announcement
> was made on the html-tidy mailing list back in May), you may not have
> about the Tidy project on SourceForge <grin>.
> Feel free to visit, and download the current source.
> >Is anyone starting automake/autoconf for tidy?
> I think the current plan is to not to do this for the current code, but to
> do it when we start designing the library version of Tidy. I'm not a
> automake/autoconf expert, so any help would be welcome.
> I suggest you (Allan) might want to join the tidy-develop mailing list, so
> we can hash ideas like this out. See <http://tidy.sourceforge.net> for
> details.

Well, now, I would have, but according to the authorative source for HTML
Tidy (w3.org) tidy.sf.net does not exist.  No mention is made of tidy
existing in any other place.  That seems to be a split or rift in the
development; I mean, if tidy.sf.net was not a split from w3's version, w3's
web content would indicate the existence of tidy.sf.net.

SO... what gives?

Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2001 19:10:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:38:50 UTC