W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > October to December 2001

Re: [Tidy-dev] Accessibility checking in Tidy

From: Terry Teague <terry_teague@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 00:19:29 -0800
Message-Id: <l03130300b80e9c8846e8@[17.219.108.29]>
To: <html-tidy@w3.org>
Cc: <tidy-develop@lists.sourceforge.net>
[Please note I have now removed Chris/Mike from the recipient lists since
they both subscribe to the "tidy-develop" list - trying to cut down on the
number of copies of mail I receive <grin>]

At 4:34 PM -0500 11/6/01, Chris Ridpath wrote:
>We can identify the priority level of the accessibility error in the
>warning/error message if that would be helpful.

>Our initial thought was that since you specified the error level on the
>command line that you didn't need it for each error/warning message.

Speaking for myself, that should be sufficient.

>We're working on some explanation text for each warning/error and expect it
>to be done in 2 weeks.
>
>I'm not sure how this would be integrated with the program. Should we have a
>"verbose" mode where you get a about a paragraph of explanation for each
>warning/error?

I could see a future version of Tidy possibly giving the user more control
over what gets displayed (e.g. identify the priority level of the
accessibility error in the warning/error message; "verbose" mode, etc) - I
would try to do that without introducing lots more new configuration
options - maybe a more general solution to setting configuration variables
(e.g. "--some-option {var1=setting1, var2=setting2}") would be something
that would be useful in a library version of Tidy.

As to solving the problem of "verbose" mode now, I would model it using
what the current version of Tidy does for its summary. I plan to mock up a
starting point for this based on the current accessibility code, and make
the binaries available, so people can get a feel for it, before we get
carried away.

Regards, Terry
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2001 03:20:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 April 2012 06:13:46 GMT