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 Windows
> 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 known
> 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?

Allan

Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2001 17:04:00 UTC