On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 08:19:49PM -0700, Eric GAUDET wrote:
-- En reponse de "Re: [Dillo-dev] Re: /. crap" de Geoff Lane, le 18-Oct-2003 :
I have a suggestion regarding this: While supporting broken HTML isn't really in the project goals, would it be possible to wrap a tool like htmltidy using the dpi?
So that dillo itself never even gets delivered broken HTML at all, becauses it's all been pre-processed into something valid...
One of the objections to accepting and attempting to display broken HTML is that you have no idea if the browser interpretation of the bad HTML matches the intention of the author. <snip> The only effort we make towards broken html is trying as hard as we can not to segfault. If a broken page is not rendering properly in Dillo (or any browser), it's a bug in the page, not a bug in Dillo. Period.
OK, your response ( and the others ) has convinced me that this was a bad idea :) I realize this thread comes up periodically, I only mentioned it this time because it was a way of minimizing the problem outside of the core, by reusing existing tools (like tidy). Also, it gets tiresome loading up another browser after a while with large sites, like slashdot, that can't easily fix their problems. ( That's one downside of using dillo - once you get used it, it's hard to tolerate anything else :) -- Stephen Lewis