* Andrew Shugg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-04-16 22:18]: > To clarify what I outlined in #186740, if you were to start with this > sort of string: > > &foo blah & <url> > > you would end up with this in the HTML: > > &foo blah & <url> > > which would be rendered in the browser (ie entities decoded) like this: > > &foo blah & <url> > > The last line is what we _see_, but the second last line is what is > actually in the HTML. I'm not sure I described it clearly enough in > #186740, sorry. Valid HTML entities will be normalised, everything else > will be preserved.
And I personally think that this is wrong (and if I understand is also
Dennis opinion):
When I write one of my package descriptions like this:
Description: the foo that does blah
This package realizes an implemention of foo that does blah.
Some of the options are:
.
&foo blah & <url>
Then I *DON'T* want it to be rendered on the website as this:
&foo blah & <url>
But I want it to have it on the website as this:
&foo blah & <url>
The packages page should NOT change the content of the descriptions IN
ANY CASE, whatever the reasons would be! So it should be replaced to a
string like this:
&foo blah &amp; <url>
Of course the url could be replaced with <a href="url">url</a>, but
that's not the topic of this bug.
Joy, do you really insist on changing the _content_ of the package
descriptions which are text/plain, to make them show _different_
informations than the various package management tools do?? That is a
bad thing and I guess your mind is twisted currently, as an excuse :)
Have fun,
Alfie
--
> Wozu ein Forum, wenn's Usenet gibt?
Fuer jedes neue Forum eine neue Oberflaeche zu lernen, bringt mehr
Abwechslung ins Leben
-- Alexander Talos in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpmhFKn4uuPF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
