W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Formatting ASP.NET code

From: Tommi <tommiweb1@q1b.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 17:22:42 +0200
Message-ID: <40F54FC2.5090905@q1b.com>
To: Cory Nelson <phrosty@gmail.com>
Cc: html-tidy@w3.org

That's great news! Would you be able to push forward with something that 
would help us get this thing integrated with VS.NET?

I think the main prob is allready recognised: handling asp:* and uc? 
tags. VS.NET create's a tag looking like uc1 for usercontrols dropped 
into the page beign designed (could be matched with (uc[\d+]:\S+) ).

Am I the only one that's getting my <asp: tags moved from the head 
section of the document into the body .. :)?

Calling VS.NET 2003 bug riddled may have been an over statement, but my 
frustration with the lack of XHTML support and the silly html trashing 
is just flowing over :).

Cory Nelson wrote, On 14.07.2004 16:22:

> Hehe I've had the designer munch nicely structured HTML before and I
> hate it.  Tidy would definately be a nice thing to have for that
> situation.  I even considered making a Tidy plugin for VS.NET 2003,
> but stopped because it doesn't recognize <asp:> tags.  Now that I see
> other interest in it, I might look into creating a patch.
> 
> Tidy probably sees the <asp:> tag and figures you must have meant
> &lt;asp:&gt; in the body.  Most of the time that would be a good
> thing.
> 
> I wasn't suggesting you use the Express betas in production sites,
> just thought you might be interested in fooling around with it. 
> Getting off topic now, but how is 2003 bug riddled?  The only problems
> I've found in it is complicated C/C++ sometimes screws up
> Intellisense.
> 
Received on Wednesday, 14 July 2004 11:22:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:15:54 UTC