- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

name/id bug

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 12:38:20PM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:06:11AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 10:58:37AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 06:22:54AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > <a name="a"></a> > > > > > > > > > > > > <a name="same" id="same"></a> > > > > > > > > gives > > > > HTML warning: line 2, 'id' and 'name' attribute of <a> tag differ > > > > HTML warning: line 4, Anchor names must be unique within the document > > > > > > > > Dillo would seem to be unhappy now that the id attr is checked before > > > > open_a checks the name attr -- but then it looks like the move was > > > > made in October (a88b4a31cb7a) and I have a dillo around from > > > > roughly Dec. 22 that does not have a problem with this. > > > > > > Yes, the problem was caused by moving the check. > > > > > > > > > > > In any case, I don't know whether there are styleEngine issues with > > > > just sticking the id check back after the open. > > > > > > We need to parse the "id" attribute before the open, as it's used to > > > determine the style used in open*. > > > > > > But I don't understand the reason for the name/id check in the first > > > place: > > > > > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > > > <html> > > > <head> <title>foo bar</title> </head> > > > <body> > > > <a name="foo" id="bar">foo bar</a> > > > </body> > > > </html> > > > > > > is correct HTML according to http://validator.w3.org/. > > > I would propose to remove this check completely. Opinions? > > > > Ooops, stop! > > I just found this: http://www.validome.org/lang/ge/errors/MISC/3005 > > It seems that name and id must be equal and it's a bug in > > http://validator.w3.org/ that it doesn't catch it. > > I will try to fix the check in dillo. > > Please test/review current tip After a quick review, it seems to me that the proper solution is to add a test in the open function for A, APPLET, FORM, FRAME, IFRAME, IMG and MAP. Something like: if (id && nameVal && strcmp(nameVal, id)) BUG_MSG("'id' and 'name' attribute of <%s> tag differ\n", tag_name); if (nameVal) Html_add_anchor(html, nameVal); -- Cheers Jorge.-

Feb. 6, 2009

name/id bug

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:06:46AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:06:11AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 10:58:37AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 06:22:54AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > <a name="a"></a> > > > > > > > > > > > > <a name="same" id="same"></a> > > > > > > > > gives > > > > HTML warning: line 2, 'id' and 'name' attribute of <a> tag differ > > > > HTML warning: line 4, Anchor names must be unique within the document > > > > > > > > Dillo would seem to be unhappy now that the id attr is checked before > > > > open_a checks the name attr -- but then it looks like the move was > > > > made in October (a88b4a31cb7a) and I have a dillo around from > > > > roughly Dec. 22 that does not have a problem with this. > > > > > > Yes, the problem was caused by moving the check. > > > > > > > > > > > In any case, I don't know whether there are styleEngine issues with > > > > just sticking the id check back after the open. > > > > > > We need to parse the "id" attribute before the open, as it's used to > > > determine the style used in open*. > > > > > > But I don't understand the reason for the name/id check in the first > > > place: > > > > > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > > > <html> > > > <head> <title>foo bar</title> </head> > > > <body> > > > <a name="foo" id="bar">foo bar</a> > > > </body> > > > </html> > > > > > > is correct HTML according to http://validator.w3.org/. > > > I would propose to remove this check completely. Opinions? > > > > Ooops, stop! > > I just found this: http://www.validome.org/lang/ge/errors/MISC/3005 > > It seems that name and id must be equal and it's a bug in > > http://validator.w3.org/ that it doesn't catch it. > > I will try to fix the check in dillo. > > Yeah, please give it a hand. Dillo is broken on this check, > e.g.: > > http://www.validome.org/lang/en/ > > Dillo counts one bug: > > "HTML warning: line 30, Anchor names must be unique within the document" > > but line 30 is OK: > > "<a id="top" name="top"></a>" BTW, current tip works right with this page. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Feb. 6, 2009

name/id bug

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:06:11AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 10:58:37AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 06:22:54AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > <a name="a"></a> > > > > > > > > > <a name="same" id="same"></a> > > > > > > gives > > > HTML warning: line 2, 'id' and 'name' attribute of <a> tag differ > > > HTML warning: line 4, Anchor names must be unique within the document > > > > > > Dillo would seem to be unhappy now that the id attr is checked before > > > open_a checks the name attr -- but then it looks like the move was > > > made in October (a88b4a31cb7a) and I have a dillo around from > > > roughly Dec. 22 that does not have a problem with this. > > > > Yes, the problem was caused by moving the check. > > > > > > > > In any case, I don't know whether there are styleEngine issues with > > > just sticking the id check back after the open. > > > > We need to parse the "id" attribute before the open, as it's used to > > determine the style used in open*. > > > > But I don't understand the reason for the name/id check in the first > > place: > > > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > > <html> > > <head> <title>foo bar</title> </head> > > <body> > > <a name="foo" id="bar">foo bar</a> > > </body> > > </html> > > > > is correct HTML according to http://validator.w3.org/. > > I would propose to remove this check completely. Opinions? > > Ooops, stop! > I just found this: http://www.validome.org/lang/ge/errors/MISC/3005 > It seems that name and id must be equal and it's a bug in > http://validator.w3.org/ that it doesn't catch it. > I will try to fix the check in dillo. Yeah, please give it a hand. Dillo is broken on this check, e.g.: http://www.validome.org/lang/en/ Dillo counts one bug: "HTML warning: line 30, Anchor names must be unique within the document" but line 30 is OK: "<a id="top" name="top"></a>" -- Cheers Jorge.-

Feb. 6, 2009

Re: view stylesheets from page menu

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 03:48:56PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Johannes wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 08:19:03AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > To me: It looks more like a developers feature than one for user level. > > > > Well, not more than "View page source". > > Yes, the same charge could be levelled against the bug meter. > > > I think it's important and in the spirit of dillo to make the web as > > transparent for the user as possible. > > Well said. > > And part of my motivation was that I was thinking of extending what > I have now so that I could examine the URLs before loading them. No problem at all. I just don't want to clutter menus very much. BTW a simple preference in the same way as the button panel solves it, if necessary. corvid: please clean it up, and bundle "Load images" after a menu separator after the CSS section of the tools menu. The "load on/off" icon at the bottom should dissappear then. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Feb. 6, 2009

name/id bug

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:06:11AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 10:58:37AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 06:22:54AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > <a name="a"></a> > > > > > > > > > <a name="same" id="same"></a> > > > > > > gives > > > HTML warning: line 2, 'id' and 'name' attribute of <a> tag differ > > > HTML warning: line 4, Anchor names must be unique within the document > > > > > > Dillo would seem to be unhappy now that the id attr is checked before > > > open_a checks the name attr -- but then it looks like the move was > > > made in October (a88b4a31cb7a) and I have a dillo around from > > > roughly Dec. 22 that does not have a problem with this. > > > > Yes, the problem was caused by moving the check. > > > > > > > > In any case, I don't know whether there are styleEngine issues with > > > just sticking the id check back after the open. > > > > We need to parse the "id" attribute before the open, as it's used to > > determine the style used in open*. > > > > But I don't understand the reason for the name/id check in the first > > place: > > > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > > <html> > > <head> <title>foo bar</title> </head> > > <body> > > <a name="foo" id="bar">foo bar</a> > > </body> > > </html> > > > > is correct HTML according to http://validator.w3.org/. > > I would propose to remove this check completely. Opinions? > > Ooops, stop! > I just found this: http://www.validome.org/lang/ge/errors/MISC/3005 > It seems that name and id must be equal and it's a bug in > http://validator.w3.org/ that it doesn't catch it. > I will try to fix the check in dillo. Please test/review current tip Cheers, Johannes

Feb. 6, 2009

name/id bug

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 10:58:37AM +0100, Hofmann Johannes wrote: > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 06:22:54AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > <a name="a"></a> > > > > > > <a name="same" id="same"></a> > > > > gives > > HTML warning: line 2, 'id' and 'name' attribute of <a> tag differ > > HTML warning: line 4, Anchor names must be unique within the document > > > > Dillo would seem to be unhappy now that the id attr is checked before > > open_a checks the name attr -- but then it looks like the move was > > made in October (a88b4a31cb7a) and I have a dillo around from > > roughly Dec. 22 that does not have a problem with this. > > Yes, the problem was caused by moving the check. > > > > > In any case, I don't know whether there are styleEngine issues with > > just sticking the id check back after the open. > > We need to parse the "id" attribute before the open, as it's used to > determine the style used in open*. > > But I don't understand the reason for the name/id check in the first > place: > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > <html> > <head> <title>foo bar</title> </head> > <body> > <a name="foo" id="bar">foo bar</a> > </body> > </html> > > is correct HTML according to http://validator.w3.org/. > I would propose to remove this check completely. Opinions? Ooops, stop! I just found this: http://www.validome.org/lang/ge/errors/MISC/3005 It seems that name and id must be equal and it's a bug in http://validator.w3.org/ that it doesn't catch it. I will try to fix the check in dillo. Cheers, Johannes

Feb. 6, 2009

name/id bug

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 06:22:54AM +0000, corvid wrote: > <a name="a"></a> > > > <a name="same" id="same"></a> > > gives > HTML warning: line 2, 'id' and 'name' attribute of <a> tag differ > HTML warning: line 4, Anchor names must be unique within the document > > Dillo would seem to be unhappy now that the id attr is checked before > open_a checks the name attr -- but then it looks like the move was > made in October (a88b4a31cb7a) and I have a dillo around from > roughly Dec. 22 that does not have a problem with this. Yes, the problem was caused by moving the check. > > In any case, I don't know whether there are styleEngine issues with > just sticking the id check back after the open. We need to parse the "id" attribute before the open, as it's used to determine the style used in open*. But I don't understand the reason for the name/id check in the first place: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <title>foo bar</title> </head> <body> <a name="foo" id="bar">foo bar</a> </body> </html> is correct HTML according to http://validator.w3.org/. I would propose to remove this check completely. Opinions? Cheers, Johannes

Feb. 6, 2009

name/id bug

by corvid＠lavabit.com

<a name="a"></a> <a name="same" id="same"></a> gives HTML warning: line 2, 'id' and 'name' attribute of <a> tag differ HTML warning: line 4, Anchor names must be unique within the document Dillo would seem to be unhappy now that the id attr is checked before open_a checks the name attr -- but then it looks like the move was made in October (a88b4a31cb7a) and I have a dillo around from roughly Dec. 22 that does not have a problem with this. In any case, I don't know whether there are styleEngine issues with just sticking the id check back after the open.

Feb. 6, 2009

RE: Free HG performance

by dillo-dev＠toykeeper.net

* Halbersma, Christopher <CHalbersma.12(a)westminster-mo.edu> wrote: > Souceforge always seemed pretty good at hosting open souce > projects. Of course I could be wrong there. It used to be The Place for hosting open projects, years ago... but its service and policies have been slowly declining while better alternatives popped up. The other services I've seen mentioned so far are FreeHG, BitBucket, Savannah, and Launchpad. FreeHG hosts Mercurial branches. It sounds like it's not reliable though, and doesn't really do anything else. BitBucket provides Mercurial hosting, bug tracking, and a wiki. I haven't found more than a summary about it. Savannah was born from an old open-source version of SourceForge. It is similar but has better code hosting options (including hg and git). It currently hosts 3022 projects, 60739 users, and 25504 bugs. Launchpad is an original project management service from Canonical, and offers relatively unique options (see the tour for details). It currently hosts 10141 projects, 2560014 users, 4310 teams, 323833 bugs, 24561 branches, 1117574 translations, 59871 answers, and 14499 blueprints. This is an exciting time for community software development... the past couple years have been a very creative time full of new ideas about how to collaborate, and it looks like things are only accelerating from here. Although it can be hard to decide which emerging systems to use, I'm happy to have no lack of options. :) -- Scott

Feb. 6, 2009

RE: Free HG performance

by CHalbersma.12＠westminster-mo.edu

Souceforge always seemed pretty good at hosting open souce projects. Of course I could be wrong there. Christopher "Chewy" R. Halbersma

Feb. 6, 2009