Re: Re: [Text_Wiki] Re: [PEAR-DEV] Re: [Text_Wiki] Text_Markup , some necessary evolution of Text_Wiki ?
| From: | Seth Price | Date: | Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:23:03 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [Text_Wiki] Re: [PEAR-DEV] Re: [Text_Wiki] Text_Markup , some necessary evolution of Text_Wiki ? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-41051@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
I'm trying to say that I already have a stack based validator written in PHP that you (we?) are free to use. If you are using any sort of nested, XML like, code, I have code that can already validate it. While we are at it, it can also correct it, or ignore bad tags.
Since you mention it, I also have a large set of unit tests in the HTML_BBCodeParser that I have linked. You should take a look. I think that anything that depreciates *both* Text_Wiki and HTML_BBCodeParser should be able to handle them at a minimum.
~Seth
On Jan 23, 2006, at 10:16 AM, Paul M Jones wrote:
On Jan 23, 2006, at 10:07 AM, Seth Price wrote:I should point out that more information about my version of HTML_BBCodeParser can be found here: http://beeblex.com/lists/index.php/php.pear.dev/40992Whoops, I misread this: I saw "tests" and skipped the rest. We need unit testing very badly, but I'm not convinced that markup validation is one of our goals; that kind of thing can be handled better by other tools. Sorry to mislead anyone from my poor attention-paying skills. -- Paul M. Jones <http://paul-m-jones.com> Solar: Simple Object Library and Application Repository for PHP5. <http://solarphp.com> Savant: The simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to Smarty for templates in PHP. <http://phpsavant.com> --PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.phpYou guys should pay more attention to my posts about HTML_BBCodeParser. I already have code like that written for HTML_BBCodeParser, and it is not tied to XHTML. It already validates the correct nesting of tags. It can then "refuse" as you said, but it can also simply ignore bad tags, delete them, or correct them. The default is to correct the bad tags when possible.* we miss some global coherence tests as , say (html) <i><u> ... </i></u> and more ... I would point out Text_Markup mission cannot be to correct but refuse, eventuallyI completely agree; the next version (Text_Markup) needs testing as part of the contribution process.