Me likey On Mar 24, 5:34 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On the subject of auto-closing tags: this is probably something you'll > see in the upcoming 1.7 release. > > - Nathan > > Hampton wrote: > > Haml does indeed make it *easier*. > > > Not to totally pass the buck (since, as the lead developer, I should > > have checked the work done), but our new designer who is just learning > > XHTML would do things like <div>'s inside of <ul>'s, non-atomic input > > tags, and a repeating partial with a <span><p></p></span>... > > > It is entirely possible to mis-apply XHTML with Haml, which has been > > proven in this thread. ;) > > > -hampton. > > > On 3/24/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> That's cool. I was just a little shocked when a pure HAML site had so > >> many validation errors. In my research of HAML, it seems like I had > >> read in a couple of places that HAML makes it much easier to create > >> valid markup. > > >> It seemed like the most common error was non-self-closing tags. I read > >> in the monolithic ruby-forum post (http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/ > >> 81244) that a lot of people thought it would be useful to auto-close > >> tags like input, img, etc... Is that a feature you've chosen to leave > >> out? > > >> Sorry if my initial post felt like a dig, I realize now I didn't > >> really qualify it. I'm actually pretty stoked to start using HAML. > >> You've done some great work here. Thanks Hampton. > > >> Jedidiah > > >> On Mar 22, 9:26 pm, Hampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>> I have gotten it down to 2 errors now (actual errors... it says 4, but > >>> they are 2) and if I fix them they will most likely break the styles > >>> on the site. So, I'll get to them later. > > >>> -hampton. > > >>> On 3/22/07, Hampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>>> A) Designers aren't as familiar with the XHTML spec as I'd like. > >>>> B) What kind of person runs validations on people sites anyway? Get a > >>>> job! Haml does not require XHTML spec validation, nor will it ever. > >>>> C) That being said, this is something that should be fixed. I will fix > >>>> it as best I can without breaking the code that the designers wrote or > >>>> wasting my time. It was a mistake and I should fix it. > >>>> D) It works on all browsers... IE5, 6, 7, Safari, and Firefox. And > >>>> *that* I'm proud of. > > >>>> -hampton. > > >>>> On 3/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>>>>http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.projectbreakout.co... > > >>>>> hmmmmm.... > > >>>>> On Mar 22, 8:23 am, "hampton c" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>>>>> Yes. Haml is definitely being used in > >>>>>> production.http://www.projectbreakout.com > >>>>>> is a site we just recently launched that is pure-Haml.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
