On 10/04/16 23:23, James C wrote:

Hi All,

I wonder what the steps are, to have a conversation about whether this is a good move: http://lists.dillo.org/pipermail/dillo-dev/2014-August/010200.html

Regards, James.

I just quickly looked at that. It is not right. You can't guess. Dillo does the right thing in that what it doesn't understand it drops and uses a safe 'auto' value. 'px' '%' et al are all rendered differently, so you can't ignore one that the code doesn't know what to do with - i.e.: "ignoring garbage; using %g (possibly in pixels)\n", Possibly? That could be dangerous, if not bad coding. Nick

On 11/04/2016, Nick Warne <nick at linicks.net> wrote:

...

On 10/04/16 16:21, Sebastian Geerken wrote:

...

On So, Apr 10, 2016, Nick Warne wrote:

...

I have noticed that Dillo doesn't render px properly - this snippet:

<hr width=500px align=left>

just produces:

.

Using 50% (e.g.) works OK. Is this bad HTML or a 'to-do' thing?

The HTML width attribute (which is depricated, btw) does not support "px", instead, <hr width=500 ...> would be correct.

Yes, thanks, I just sussed that out. Dillo is great for debugging HTML, as most browsers somehow parse crappy input into what seems right (but is wrong!).

width=475 works great now.

Thanks,

Nick

-- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"

_______________________________________________ Dillo-dev mailing list Dillo-dev at dillo.org http://lists.dillo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev

-- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"