Peter GILMAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> first of all, thanks for taking the time and energy to consider this
> issue. i was only hoping to pick up a pointer or two; i never
> realized this could turn out to be such a big deal!
Neither did we. :-)
> 1) Jens' observation that the user will th
greetings, wget people:
first of all, thanks for taking the time and energy to consider this
issue. i was only hoping to pick up a pointer or two; i never realized
this could turn out to be such a big deal!
now then:
Hrvoje Niksic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> rubbed two wires together, resulting
in the
t: Re: problem with LF/CR etc.
"Post, Mark K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That is _really_ ugly, and perhaps immoral. Make it an option, if
> you must. Certainly don't make it the default behavior.
An option for each corner case would very quickly lead to severe
option bl
Hi Hrvoje and all others,
> > It would do away with multiple (sometimes obscure) options few
> > users use and combine them in one.
> You don't need bitfields for that; you can have an option like
> `--strict-html=foo,bar,baz' where one or more of "foo", "bar" and
> "baz" are recognized and inter
"Jens Rösner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Hrvoje and all other,
>
>> It forces the user to remember what each number means, and then have
>> to add those numbers in his head. Unix utilities already have the
>> reputation of being user-unfriendly; why make things worse?
>
> It would do away w
Hi Hrvoje and all other,
> It forces the user to remember what each number means, and then have
> to add those numbers in his head. Unix utilities already have the
> reputation of being user-unfriendly; why make things worse?
It would do away with multiple (sometimes obscure) options few
users
Dražen Kačar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
>
>> acknowledge it altogether. The worst thing to do is require the user
>> to investigate why the HTML didn't parse, only to discover that Wget
>> in fact had the ability to process it, but didn't bother to do so by
>> default.
>
>
Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
> acknowledge it altogether. The worst thing to do is require the user
> to investigate why the HTML didn't parse, only to discover that Wget
> in fact had the ability to process it, but didn't bother to do so by
> default.
You can have both things, kind of. First you try to
"Jens Rösner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> bitfields [in option arguments]: Ok. Any (short) reason for that? Is
> it consider as not transparent or as ugly?
It forces the user to remember what each number means, and then have
to add those numbers in his head. Unix utilities already have the
rep
Hi,
just an additional remark to my own posting.
> > There is no easy way to punish the culprit. The only thing you can do
> > in the long run is refuse to interoperate with something that openly
> > breaks applicable standards. Otherwise you're not only rewarding the
> > culprit, but destroyi
Hi all!
> There is no easy way to punish the culprit. The only thing you can do
> in the long run is refuse to interoperate with something that openly
> breaks applicable standards. Otherwise you're not only rewarding the
> culprit, but destroying all the other tools because they will sooner
> o
"Jens Rösner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Do you propose that squashing newlines would break legitimate uses
>> of unescaped newlines in links?
>
> I personally think that this is the main question. If it doesn't
> break other things, implement "squashing newlines" as the default
> behaviour.
Hi!
> Do you propose that squashing newlines would break legitimate uses of
> unescaped newlines in links?
I personally think that this is the main question.
If it doesn't break other things, implement "squashing newlines"
as the default behaviour.
> Or are you arguing on principle that
> such
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: problem with LF/CR etc.
Peter GILMAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i have run into a problem while using wget: when viewing a web page with
> html like this:
>
>
Eek! Are people really doing that? This is news to me.
> browsers (i tested with
Peter GILMAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i have run into a problem while using wget: when viewing a web page with
> html like this:
>
>
Eek! Are people really doing that? This is news to me.
> browsers (i tested with mozilla and IE) can handle the line breaks
> in the urls (presumably st
hello.
i have run into a problem while using wget: when viewing a web page with
html like this:
browsers (i tested with mozilla and IE) can handle the line breaks in
the urls (presumably stripping them out), but wget chokes on the
linefeeds and carriage returns; it inserts them into the ur
16 matches
Mail list logo
