- From: Jelks Cabaniss <jelks@jelks.nu>
- Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 02:29:28 -0400
- To: <html-tidy@w3.org>
Miscellaneous comments in no particular order of the April 8th release: 1) With the indent option, you get newlines after the opening and before the closing tags, something like: <p> Hello World, how are you? </p> Without it, you get something like: <p>Hello World. how are you</p> While indenting, I find "non-broken" content for block level elements cleaner, as in: <p>Hello World, how are you?</p> i.e.., like the non-indented version, only indented. ... :) 2) "quote-ampersands", while mentioned in the release notes and in the sample, does not appear to be in configuration file option descriptions. 3) Specifying "indent: no" on XML output doesn't *appear* to work. 4) Maybe the intent is to leave command-line arguments behind for good in favor of the config file. But I think common options should be available from the command line as well. Specifically -- XHTML output! 5) SCRIPT and STYLE containers should be commented for legacy browsers. Well, not *just* legacy browsers -- Altavista indexes on uncommented STYLE contents! :) (or at least *did*, maybe they've fixed that...) At least it should be an option. 6) There should perhaps be a "requested-DOCTYPE: ..." in the configuration file that would override the current heuristics. The values could be "Strict", "Transitional" (and maybe "Omit"?); the rest could be determined from whether the user specified XHTML output or not. 7) I couldn't see any difference in specifying "new-inline-tags" and "new-blocklevel-tags" and omitting them entirely in the output of XML-to-XML. 8) What the heck does the "markup: yes|no" option do? The description says: "Determines whether Tidy generates a pretty printed version of the markup." What does this mean? When is output *not* "pretty printed"? I couldn't tell from playing with it -- I'm sure I'm missing something obvious. 9) Is anybody perhaps working on making an ActiveX control out of Tidy, where you could set properties programmatically instead of reading a config file/command line arguments? 10) Gotta go. Great program (Thanks, Dave)! :) /Jelks
Received on Saturday, 10 April 1999 02:30:07 UTC