[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html
From: |
Peter Wright |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html |
Date: |
Sat, 30 Dec 2006 12:47:32 +0900 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
On 29/12 17:19:45, Zbigniew wrote:
> [Peter Wright wrote:]
> >I'm guessing SXML->HTML has a special-case handling for the
> >standard "inline"-display HTML tags
>
> Yep. As I mentioned, I added inline tag handling to
> sxml-transforms, to avoid rendering issues.
D'oh! Of course you did. Sorry, I didn't fully register that when I
read (=> quickly scanned) your first response.
> It treats the following tags as "inline":
>
> (define xhtml-inline-elements
> '(a abbr acronym cite code dfn em font kbd q samp strong var
> b big i small strike sub sup tt u blink span))
>
> Other tags are considered "block" and get a newline. Another
> feature is that certain empty tags use the minimized close tag form,
> for xhtml compatibility:
>
> (define xhtml-empty-elements '(base meta link hr br param img area
> input col))
Cool, that's a nice bonus.
Thanks for the (extra) clarification. :)
Pete.
--
http://flooble.net/blog
"If you have any trouble sounding condescending, find a Unix user to
show you how it's done." -- Scott Adams
- [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html, Peter Wright, 2006/12/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html, Peter Bex, 2006/12/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html, Zbigniew, 2006/12/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html, felix winkelmann, 2006/12/28
- spiffy patch attempt (was Re: [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html), Peter Wright, 2006/12/31
- Re: spiffy patch attempt (was Re: [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html), John Cowan, 2006/12/31
- Re: spiffy patch attempt (was Re: [Chicken-users] Minor issue with spiffy's sxml->html), Peter Wright, 2006/12/31