https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40329
--- Comment #23 from Daniel Friesen <mediawiki-b...@nadir-seen-fire.com> 2012-09-24 18:28:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #22) > (In reply to comment #20) > > when it's done properly and without breaking things. > > It is not done properly. It breaks things. This is what this bug is about. See > my example in the first comment. > > (In reply to comment #21) > > You originally said "because you never can say how browsers were handling it > > (and different browsers handle stuff differently)" > > I have not said that. > > > it's our responsibility to not output stuff that was removed. > > It was not removed. Every web browser in the world is able to render align > attributes properly. With your current hack you are doing the job of the we > browser and you are doing it bad. There is no need to replicate something that > *every* web browser in the world can do by it's own. We output HTML5. Align was removed from HTML5. Browsers support align to support HTML 3.2. We don't output HTML 3.2. Hence what the browser can do is irrelevant, it's our responsibility to not put align in the page output. > > it is also our responsibility to ensure that pages written in WikiText > > continue to work > > Then do this please. Currently an unknown number of WikiText pages do not > continue to work. > > except when there is a bug we have to fix > > What bug? There was no bug with the align properties. It worked fine for > decades and it will continue to work for decades. align is not valid output it's our job not to output it, that is a bug. > > Breaking every article > > What are you talking about? Absolutely nothing will break if you output the > align attributes. That was a reference to the suggestion of removing align="" entirely. If we do that then everything breaks instead of just some things. > > It's only broken if it looks broken. > > Again, what are you talking about? It *does* look broken. This is what this > bug > is about. You said "It makes broken code *not* look broken. It does not fix anything. It does not help people to fix their outdated template code. It does the *opposite*." I replied saying that if the output does not look broken then the code is not broken. In other words, I'm saying that if something uses align="" but does not look broken after we translate that to css. Then the template is not broken and there is no need to change the template code. > > MediaWiki outputted incorrect markup. > > Then drop your support for this markup if you consider it "incorrect". Tell > the > people it will be dropped, give them some time and then drop it. Either this > or > continue to support it. But don't change the *meaning* of *my* code. MediaWiki's HTML output is incorrect. That doesn't make WikiText input incorrect. We are not going to drop something 100% from WikiText just to fix invalid HTML output when we can instead output valid HTML that works 90% of the time. > > So yes, your templates were broken > > No, they were not. They worked fine and they will work find for the next > decades. I tested them in every browser. There was no bug. *You* introduced a > bug. Outputting invalid markup is a bug. It doesn't matter if it worked fine, it was a bug. I would appreciate it if you would stop splitting up my sentences, replying to a chunk of a sentence as if it were a whole senescence, and completely omitting other parts of the same paragraph as if they didn't exist. Frankly it makes it look like you are trying to commit the "Strawman" logical fallacy just to make a point. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
