Re: Check existence of class names

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:28:43 +0300, Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd) <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk> wrote:
> chukharev@mail.ru wrote:
>  > On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 23:56:46 +0300, Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd)
>  > <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk> wrote:

> Agreed, but ...

Great!

> OK, so essentially you are willing to restrict yourself
> (or your proposed consistency checks) to the meta-document
> that is the union of the HTML page and its statically
> linked style sheets.  Fair enough.

Well, 'restrict' is a bit too strong word, I'd like some
help in identifying relevant places. Also, statically or
dynamically linked CSS/javasripts/whatever - I do not mind.
Better, all of them.

>  > A list of the undefined and a list of the unused names, each
>  > with document names and line numbers would quite satisfy me.
>
> But you mustn't call them "undefined" :-)  "Unmatched",
> or "unpaired", if you like, but not "undefined", please.

OK. A list of unresolved and lists of unused names per source of
redefining (CSS, javascripts etc), each with document names and line
numbers would quite satisfy me. The generation of the lists is to be
optional and not done by default.
;-))

> with which HTML files it is intended to be used.  So whilst
> I continue to have sympathy with the idea of reporting
> "unresolved" class names (see above), reporting "unused" class
> names (see above) is likely to result in an excessive
> number of false positives.

In my small experience it's relatively easy to subdivide a big
CSS file into a set of files with hierarchic inclusions and use
only the needed classes. The list of can help in doing so.

I realize it might be difficult to impossible to scale this up.

> ** Phil.
>
-- 
Vladimir Chukharev
Tampere University of Technology

Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2010 19:45:44 UTC