On Tuesday 03 June 2003 21:46, Bruno Dumon wrote:
BD> yeah yeah, I agree with that, and for that purpose the tidyserializer is
BD> very valuable. I was only wondering if there were any blocking bugs in
BD> the normal htmlserializer that make it impossible to generate valid html
BD> (next to the namespace problem).
No real blocking. For most problems, there is a simple workaround.
BD> (I'll look into applying the tidyserializer.)
When you or someone else wants to apply it, I'll provide xdocs for it,
including all supported parameter by tidy.
BD> TK> You have to validate the output to see if it's valid.
BD> Is there any other way to validate the output then by validating it?
Was written bad. You have to validate the output with an external program to
see if it is valid. That's what I meat.
BD> If "the job" means that Xalan should validate the serialized xml against
BD> the DTD it references, then I think it's a pretty save bet to say that
BD> will never ever happen.
I hope it removes not allowed and not needed namespaces. For deciding what
namespaces are allowed, it has to do validation. But I also don't think that
chances for this aren't very good. I think this is a item for my long getting
todo.
Regards
Torsten
--
Domain in provider transition, hope for smoothness. Planed date is 1.7.2003.
