W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: <HR> in <PRE>

From: Klaus Johannes Rusch <KlausRusch@atmedia.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 12:14:00 -0100
Message-ID: <3C5A9498.4892F0DE@atmedia.net>
To: "Richard A. O'Keefe" <ok@atlas.otago.ac.nz>
CC: html-tidy@w3.org
"Richard A. O'Keefe" wrote:
>         There is "current processing" in tidy, and tidy users may have
>         used this tidy feature to generate valid markup from an input
>         source with misplaced tags in <pre> sections.
> 
> Ahem.  The whole point of this thread is that someone was using a program
> that generated <HR> inside <PRE> and it was *killing* Tidy; so nobody
> could possibly have been relying on it to do anything in particular.

The output was different from what one Tidy user had expected, other
users may have used Tidy to clean up different code bits, like this:

HTML Example:

<pre>

  <h1>This is a headline</h1>
  <ul>
    <li>And a list, too</li>
  </ul>
</pre>

which Tidy turns into a valid, nicely formatted example of HTML code:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<p>HTML Example:</p>

<pre>
  &lt;h1&gt;This is a headline&lt;/h1&gt;
  &lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;And a list, too&lt;/li&gt;
  &lt;/ul&gt;
</pre>
</body>
</html>

> So I end up looking silly, because it wasn't <HR>-inside-<PRE> *as such*
> that was killing Tidy, but some particular detail (NOSHADE, maybe? I've
> lost the data and can't check this any more),

Which version of Tidy failed? I have tried this with the current
version, including noshade attributes (which gets stripped off, that's
definitely a bug!) but haven't manage to actually kill Tidy.

Tracker record for this bug:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=511679&group_id=27659&atid=390963

On the other hand I have not been able to reproduce the desired output
which you showed either.

> and Klaus Johannes Rusch ends up looking silly for claiming that modifying
> Tidy to work the way it DOES work would break things.

See above -- I don't think that flaming each other is going to help
anyone determined what the best behaviour for tidy should be. If you
believe you have a solution that satisfies everyone don't hesitate to
provide a patch to fix Tidy, though.

-- 
Klaus Johannes Rusch
KlausRusch@atmedia.net
http://www.atmedia.net/KlausRusch/
Received on Friday, 1 February 2002 11:59:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 April 2012 06:13:51 GMT