"Jitse Niesen" <jitse.niesen(a)gmail.com>
wrote in message
news:8a93c6a0602110726u576ae63eqd40d1181570e53a2@mail.gmail.com
On 2/11/06, Brion Vibber
<brion(a)pobox.com> wrote:
The optional use of tidy is a temporary hack that got put in rather
than fix up the parser's own HTML balancing code, which is a
horrible piece of crap that I wrote in 2002 when I didn't know what
the hell I was doing. :)
If you'd like try rewriting it so it balances end tags properly,
detects illegal nesting cases, and understands MathML, that would be
super awesome.
Hmm, I think it would be easier for me to change tidy so that it
understands MathML. Why do you want to get rid of tidy?
Don't beat me (with the big stick): but could tidy be kept?
It is currently co-abused for the CSS trick described at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:hiddenStructure
(But this time I'm fairly innocent)
BTW if you extend tidy it would be interesting if tidy could
remove the hiddenStructure elements from the html. We would then have a
conditional without doing any change to the wiki syntax (guaranteed no
turing completeness :-).
The current hiddenStructure hack does not work for
non-CSS browsers and older screen readers.