On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Jacob Rask wrote:
has there ever been any discussion on including an attribute to the
code element, specify the programming language in the markup? If so,
what
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Jacob Rask wrote:
has there ever been any discussion on including an attribute to the code
element, specify the programming language in the markup? If so, what was
the conclusion? I didn't find anything in
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Tab Atkins Jr.jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On the other hand,
a simple
code lang=xml/html
could be used to introduce the pre and all the lt; s
This is the one part of the suggestion that I could possibly see being
introduced in the language, but the benefit
Hi Ian,
1. Having to type precodelt;tagname/code/pre seemed a little
bit
silly to me:
is there a use case for *not* wanting pre when doing code? Could that
not
be handled as an attribute of the code if so?
code is used a lot to refer to method names and the like, where the
contents aren't
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 1:36 PM, ddaileyddai...@zoominternet.net wrote:
Hi Ian,
1. Having to type precodelt;tagname/code/pre seemed a little
bit
silly to me:
is there a use case for *not* wanting pre when doing code? Could that
not
be handled as an attribute of the code if so?
code is
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, ddailey wrote:
1. Having to type precodelt;tagname/code/pre seemed a little bit
silly to me:
is there a use case for *not* wanting pre when doing code? Could that not
be handled as an attribute of the code if so?
code is used a lot to refer to method names and the like,
ddailey writes:
I found myself rather taxed by the limitations of code
(disclaimer: I may well have been working on incorrect assumptions) 1.
Having to type pre code lt;tagname /code /pre seemed a
little bit silly to me: is there a use case for *not* wanting pre
when doing code ?
Yes:
Automatic conversion from Microsoft Word to HTML is doomed to fail because
the document models and the requirements are different. The best you can
get is a tree of DIVs and SPANs with Word-specific classes. Anything better
needs a serious and thoughtful remake by the editor.
HTH,
Chris
On Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:16 PM, Jacob Rask wrote:
has there ever been any discussion on including an attribute to the
code element, specify the programming language in the markup? If so,
what was the conclusion? I didn't find anything in the list archives.
Having just converted a 200+
Am Dienstag, den 28.04.2009, 21:16 +0200 schrieb Jacob Rask:
If not, I believe it would be a very good idea. Browsers could for
instance have default color codings for different languages, open
selected code/text in an editor associated with that language, etc...
We would need a controlled
A CODE element can belong to a class related to the programming language,
e.g.
* CODE class=HTML
* CODE class=JavaScript
* CODE class=Python
A future version of CSS can provide a property for syntax coloring.
IMHO,
Chris
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:16:59 -0400, Jacob Rask ja...@jacobrask.net wrote:
Hi,
has there ever been any discussion on including an attribute to the
code element, specify the programming language in the markup? If so,
what was the conclusion? I didn't find anything in the list archives.
If
12 matches
Mail list logo
