On Thu, Dec 06, 2001, Bill Janssen wrote:
> > BTW: What's about the idea to include some images in the plucker prc
> > and add a new function code to display them? For example we can
> > include an bullet picture and use this for rendering the ordered list
> > items (no more problems with othe
> BTW: What's about the idea to include some images in the plucker prc
> and add a new function code to display them? For example we can
> include an bullet picture and use this for rendering the ordered list
> items (no more problems with other Charsets) or an Broken Picture
Yes, I was plann
"Robert" == Robert O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Robert> Here is a binary and source of what is in the CVS at the moment:
Robert> http://www.rob.md/projects/plucker/2001_11_27/plucker_desktop.zip
Thank's get it. Now i have some Questions about it:
How does it should work together with th
"Philip" == Philip and Lorra Spitzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Philip> I am having trouble. I have downloaded and Installed python,
Philip> but I can not seem to run the windows installer on my
Philip> computer. the message that pops up is plucker1.1.13.exe is not
Philip> a validwin32 format. A
"Chris" == Chris Hawks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Whats about an option to ignore small images at all (independent from
>> the image on/off settings). Maybe say an image with an Height or width
>> of <=2. Or an image with fewer than 10 pixels?
>>
>> BTW: we need the [img] text for images tha
Kjetil:
> _I_ know that, but some of the people who create content I'm
> interested in, don't. I guess I could run everything through tidy or
> similar before giving it to Plucker, but it seems a bit overkill and
> inconvenient.
Better than that, if some recalcitrant web authors are still using
"David A. Desrosiers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I don't know, I don't care too much about spacer.gif, blank.gif, 1x1.gif
> > and all those other images commonly used in bad HTML... I think a
> > switch to get rid of images completely would harm noone and help
> > someone.
>
> That's
---On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:18:31 +0100, Dirk Heiser said
> "Kjetil" == Kjetil Torgrim Homme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Kjetil> I don't know, I don't care too much about spacer.gif, blank.gif,
> Kjetil> 1x1.gif and all those other images commonly used in bad HTML... I
> Kjetil> think a switc
"Kjetil" == Kjetil Torgrim Homme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kjetil> I don't know, I don't care too much about spacer.gif, blank.gif,
Kjetil> 1x1.gif and all those other images commonly used in bad HTML... I
Kjetil> think a switch to get rid of images completely would harm noone and
Kjetil> help
I put my vote in for a commandline switch to allow the [alt_tag] or [img] to
be stripped from the output.
Best wishes,
Robert
> I don't know, I don't care too much about spacer.gif, blank.gif, 1x1.gif
> and all those other images commonly used in bad HTML... I think a
> switch to get rid of images completely would harm noone and help
> someone.
That's not HTML. HTML is meant for presentation, not layout. When
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There should be something to mark that an image existed, in my
> opinion. Maybe a command line option which defaults to "[img]" is
> the way to go, but dropping [img] markers is nasty.
I don't know, I don't care too much about spacer.gif, blank.gif,
1x1.gif
Brian:
> It would be a bad standard if it required everyone to change all
> their old pages every time the standard changed.
Where did I say it was required? I just said that pages that are that old
probably have other problems... however, I suspect that the problem here is
badly written HTML, r
13 matches
Mail list logo
