Re: Using Tidy for validation only

Hi,


>> It does not include those fixed errors in its error count.

> The problems it can fix are usually reported as warnings,
> or not reported at all in some cases.

I would personally like to suggest a "do not fix" paramater.
That way the counts would become correct and possible
uses of Tidy would increase.



>> it's never meant to be a fully featured HTML
>> Validator, or something along that line. (

> please don't hijack other threads. As far as I can tell, in Tidy,

Okay. I just saw related topic to what I ealier
emailed about to mailing list, and took the
opportunity to argue for it again. Sorry


best regards
Tom


-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- 
From: aditsu
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 2:56 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Using Tidy for validation only



ts-15 wrote:
>
> I am not interested in using Tidy for fixing HTML.
> I am only interested in getting number of errors and warnings.
>

Hi, please don't hijack other threads. As far as I can tell, in Tidy,
problem reporting and correction are really tied together. You can just
ignore the fixed html (discard its output) if you don't need it.



> As it is, it seems Tidy only reports errors for HTML it can not fix.
> I deduce this from the fact that the HTML it shows in command
> line after the call appear to have been modified and "fixed".
> It does not include those fixed errors in its error count.
>

The problems it can fix are usually reported as warnings, or not reported at
all in some cases.

Adrian
-- 
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Using-Tidy-for-validation-only-tp30028662p30308921.html
Sent from the w3.org - html-tidy mailing list archive at Nabble.com.