[ewiki] Re: make PageIndex core feature?
- From: "Andy Fundinger" <andy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ewiki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 10:24:41 -0400
Problems aside, anything that can reasonably be done towards XHTML
compliance sounds good to me.
Andy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mario Salzer [mailto:mario@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 8:36 PM
> To: ewiki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ewiki] Re: make PageIndex core feature?
>
> > I recommend making CSS markup core, as well as XHTML
> compliant markup.
> > I've been going through the core and the plugins I am using
> and trying
> > to get the output XHTML compliant, as I have time. (I only
> > implemented ewiki about a week ago.)
> >
> > CSS and XHTML are extremely important to many web developers and
> > weblog users today, so any improvement there would help ewiki get
> > better recognition. There is a lot of interest in wikis now, and
> > ewiki's tight integration into existing platforms is unique!
>
> XHTML is very difficult, especially for Wikis. That's mainly
> because users may always inject invalid markup (even if it is
> the "safe" Wiki
> markup) like ''__text''__ which will result in invalidly
> nested tags then. The "plugins/filter/f_fixhtml.php"
> extension can work around a few, but this does never
> guarantee 100% valid XHTML code.
> (also see the EWIKI_XHTML setting! - ok, not too impressive still)
>
> We've taken great care to make ewiki return valid html
> (magnitudes better than with other engines), but this is
> currently not possible. Though there are other Wikis that can
> produce valid XHTML Strict. CoWiki can, because it stores
> pages already in XML, AtomWiki and Rhizome probably also can
> do this much better right now.
>
> For example the <br> tags (and others) aren't already
> converted to xhtml, because I've personally using some
> browsers, that didn't like "<br />" all too much until recently.
>
> So concluding I'd say, that ewiki itself cannot be made XHTML
> compliant overnight, and therefore filtering the output
> through libtidy (its now a standard extension in PHP?) is a
> much more reliable (and faster) solution. Extending f_fixhtml
> wasn't probably as useful as it'd only got slower.
>
> (To get quick XHTML adoption throughout the Web it is essential to
> have a mod_xhtml or mod_tidy distributed with Apache. Won't happen
> otherwhise IMO; but that's again a different topic)
>
> mario
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________
> Scanned on 15 Jun 2004 02:00:16
> Scanning by http://erado.com
>
Other related posts:
