Re: a new release ?

Dumas Patrice wrote:

>>This should probably be ignored with a warning too.  In your particular 
>>example, there is some sense in just inverting the tag order, but this 
>>is hardly the general case.
>>    
>>
>
>Indeed. And it is not obvious to handle that.
>
>As makeinfo processes it I don't think the default should be to ignore it.
>I think that most browser (if not all) will have no problem with that 
>html. Maybe what we could do is issue a warning. And also have a command line 
>switch for people wanting strict html, and in that case only ignore the
>@footnote or the @verbatim. What do you think about that ?
>  
>

That sounds better than my idea.  I hadn't considered that most browsers 
would deal with those cases.  If any don't we could always deal with it 
later, or just let your strict switch do it.  The switch probably 
shouldn't be limited to the command line, though.  Perhaps the command 
line switch could always override it, but this should be specifiable in 
the .init file, I think.  It would be nice to allow "3.2", "3.2 strict", 
"4.01", "4.01 strict", etc. packages.

Derek

-- 
                *8^)

Email: [email protected]

Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
-- 
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution
inevitable."

			-- John F. Kennedy