Re: Please don't shout or throw things at this respec newbie

On Monday, June 3, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Henry S. Thompson wrote:

> Marcos Caceres writes:
>  
> > On Monday, June 3, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
> >  
> > >  
> > > Note that this does *not* prevent you from creating your documents as
> > > XHTML, editing them with XML tools, etc. It's only a problem if they
> > > then get served as such. Is that an issue?
> > >  
> > > If it is a problem, I can try to dig to see if there's a workaround for
> > > you. But I won't ever be able to make it work across the board, only
> > > perhaps (and it's a big perhaps) for the basic features that you're
> > > currently using. As far as I can tell at this point it would involve
> > > patching jQuery to notice that it's being used in XHTML, or at least do
> > > something that mucks with its internals.
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > Yay for polyglot :)  
> >  
> > The document in question is intended to be modified/updated by the community (through pull requests), so for the benefit of the wider community, I would urge you to leave it as HTML. Apart from making a particular text editor happy, is there some other use case for having it as XML (that can't be handled by automatically converting the document to XHTML through post processing)?  
>  
> Don't worry. As you can see from the repo, I'm keeping the HTML, and
> assuming that people will work with the HTML -- I have an idempotent
> toolchain in place so that _I_ can work with the XML.
>  


Excellent. Though maybe tell git to ignore the .xhtml file so not to put it into the repo? Otherwise people might get confused as to which one to update/review (I've had this problem in other repos where I have both a index.src.html and index.html file… I sometimes get updates for the wrong one).

Received on Monday, 3 June 2013 18:21:12 UTC