"ssuukk" <ssuukk@.go2.pl> wrote in message news:buj6dr$2bq3$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >>
> >>In some HTML editors you can insert a special field that will automaticly update when you modify the document.
> >
> >
> > I don't use an html editor, I use microemacs <g>.
> >
> Unfortunately it shows: there are lots of unclosed tags,

Hmm. Can you give me an example?

> which make
> automatic translation of these pages real hell...
>

Walter wrote:

> "ssuukk" <ssuukk@.go2.pl> wrote in message
> news:buj6dr$2bq3$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>>>In some HTML editors you can insert a special field that will
>>>>automaticly update when you modify the document.
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't use an html editor, I use microemacs <g>.
>>>
>>
>>Unfortunately it shows: there are lots of unclosed tags,
> 
> 
> Hmm. Can you give me an example?

I think I can explain the unclosed tags issue, but I don't have a clue how important closed tags are to producing Latex.

In order to get html to validate, virtually all tags need to be closed.  There are a few exceptions: <hr>, <br>, <img>, <meta>, (and more?). If a <tr> occurs, it would need to be matched with a </tr>.  Also, every <td> must be matched up with a </td>.  Apparently, ssuukk's program prefers somewhat valid html.
I found an actual example in the second file I visually checked.

I think he's referring to sections like this table (in arrays.html):

    <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
	<tr><td>int* p;		<td>Pointers to data

	<tr><td>int[3] s;	<td>Static arrays

	<tr><td>int[] a;	<td>Dynamic arrays

	<tr><td>int[char[]] x;	<td>Associative arrays (discussed later)
    </table>


"Valid" html might look like this (in fact, any web browser will assume this is what you meant):

    <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
	<tr><td>int* p;		</td><td>Pointers to data</td></tr>

	<tr><td>int[3] s;	</td><td>Static arrays</td></tr>

	<tr><td>int[] a;	</td><td>Dynamic arrays</td></tr>

	<tr><td>int[char[]] x;	</td><td>Associative arrays (discussed </td>later)</tr>
    </table>


In short, it can take a lot of effort to make pages valid html with questionable benefit.

-- 
Justin
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

Using Tidy is not a lot of effort, and points you to all your "mistakes" or omissions.  Often it fixes them for you, and if it can't, it will notify you with a list including line numbers.  There are also HTML beautifiers out there as well.  They don't fix code, but they do format it nicely.

http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/tidy/

BA

> In short, it can take a lot of effort to make pages valid html with questionable benefit.
> 

Sounds like there's holes in the Latex. That can lead to a lot of crying and poopy diapers.

In article <buke02$192q$1@digitaldaemon.com>, J C Calvarese says...
>
>Walter wrote:
>
>> "ssuukk" <ssuukk@.go2.pl> wrote in message news:buj6dr$2bq3$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> 
>>>>>In some HTML editors you can insert a special field that will automaticly update when you modify the document.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I don't use an html editor, I use microemacs <g>.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Unfortunately it shows: there are lots of unclosed tags,
>> 
>> 
>> Hmm. Can you give me an example?
>
>I think I can explain the unclosed tags issue, but I don't have a clue how important closed tags are to producing Latex.
>
>In order to get html to validate, virtually all tags need to be closed.
>  There are a few exceptions: <hr>, <br>, <img>, <meta>, (and more?). If
>a <tr> occurs, it would need to be matched with a </tr>.  Also, every
><td> must be matched up with a </td>.  Apparently, ssuukk's program
>prefers somewhat valid html.
>I found an actual example in the second file I visually checked.
>
>I think he's referring to sections like this table (in arrays.html):
>
>     <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
>	<tr><td>int* p;		<td>Pointers to data
>
>	<tr><td>int[3] s;	<td>Static arrays
>
>	<tr><td>int[] a;	<td>Dynamic arrays
>
>	<tr><td>int[char[]] x;	<td>Associative arrays (discussed later)
>     </table>
>
>
>"Valid" html might look like this (in fact, any web browser will assume this is what you meant):
>
>     <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
>	<tr><td>int* p;		</td><td>Pointers to data</td></tr>
>
>	<tr><td>int[3] s;	</td><td>Static arrays</td></tr>
>
>	<tr><td>int[] a;	</td><td>Dynamic arrays</td></tr>
>
>	<tr><td>int[char[]] x;	</td><td>Associative arrays (discussed
></td>later)</tr>
>     </table>
>
>
>In short, it can take a lot of effort to make pages valid html with questionable benefit.
>
>-- 
>Justin
>http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

"J C Calvarese" <jcc7@cox.net> wrote in message news:buke02$192q$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Walter wrote:
>
> > "ssuukk" <ssuukk@.go2.pl> wrote in message news:buj6dr$2bq3$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> >>>>In some HTML editors you can insert a special field that will automaticly update when you modify the document.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I don't use an html editor, I use microemacs <g>.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Unfortunately it shows: there are lots of unclosed tags,
> >
> >
> > Hmm. Can you give me an example?
>
> I think I can explain the unclosed tags issue, but I don't have a clue how important closed tags are to producing Latex.
>
> In order to get html to validate, virtually all tags need to be closed.
>   There are a few exceptions: <hr>, <br>, <img>, <meta>, (and more?). If
> a <tr> occurs, it would need to be matched with a </tr>.  Also, every
> <td> must be matched up with a </td>.  Apparently, ssuukk's program
> prefers somewhat valid html.
> I found an actual example in the second file I visually checked.
>
> I think he's referring to sections like this table (in arrays.html):
>
>      <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
> <tr><td>int* p; <td>Pointers to data
>
> <tr><td>int[3] s; <td>Static arrays
>
> <tr><td>int[] a; <td>Dynamic arrays
>
> <tr><td>int[char[]] x; <td>Associative arrays (discussed later)
>      </table>
>
>
> "Valid" html might look like this (in fact, any web browser will assume
> this is what you meant):
>
>      <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
> <tr><td>int* p; </td><td>Pointers to data</td></tr>
>
> <tr><td>int[3] s; </td><td>Static arrays</td></tr>
>
> <tr><td>int[] a; </td><td>Dynamic arrays</td></tr>
>
> <tr><td>int[char[]] x; </td><td>Associative arrays (discussed
> </td>later)</tr>
>      </table>

It's common practice to not bother with the redundant </td> and </tr>, and if some html processor can't handle it, frankly, it's a bug in that processor. (BTW, the html spec is hardly rigorous, I've found several official conflicting definitions of what an html comment is. They haven't even gotten that right.)

Walter wrote:

>"J C Calvarese" <jcc7@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:buke02$192q$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>  
>
>>Walter wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>"ssuukk" <ssuukk@.go2.pl> wrote in message
>>>news:buj6dr$2bq3$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>>In some HTML editors you can insert a special field that will
>>>>>>automaticly update when you modify the document.
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>I don't use an html editor, I use microemacs <g>.
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>Unfortunately it shows: there are lots of unclosed tags,
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Hmm. Can you give me an example?
>>>      
>>>
>>I think I can explain the unclosed tags issue, but I don't have a clue
>>how important closed tags are to producing Latex.
>>
>>In order to get html to validate, virtually all tags need to be closed.
>>  There are a few exceptions: <hr>, <br>, <img>, <meta>, (and more?). If
>>a <tr> occurs, it would need to be matched with a </tr>.  Also, every
>><td> must be matched up with a </td>.  Apparently, ssuukk's program
>>prefers somewhat valid html.
>>I found an actual example in the second file I visually checked.
>>
>>I think he's referring to sections like this table (in arrays.html):
>>
>>     <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
>><tr><td>int* p; <td>Pointers to data
>>
>><tr><td>int[3] s; <td>Static arrays
>>
>><tr><td>int[] a; <td>Dynamic arrays
>>
>><tr><td>int[char[]] x; <td>Associative arrays (discussed later)
>>     </table>
>>
>>
>>"Valid" html might look like this (in fact, any web browser will assume
>>this is what you meant):
>>
>>     <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
>><tr><td>int* p; </td><td>Pointers to data</td></tr>
>>
>><tr><td>int[3] s; </td><td>Static arrays</td></tr>
>>
>><tr><td>int[] a; </td><td>Dynamic arrays</td></tr>
>>
>><tr><td>int[char[]] x; </td><td>Associative arrays (discussed
>></td>later)</tr>
>>     </table>
>>    
>>
>
>It's common practice to not bother with the redundant </td> and </tr>, and
>if some html processor can't handle it, frankly, it's a bug in that
>processor. (BTW, the html spec is hardly rigorous, I've found several
>official conflicting definitions of what an html comment is. They haven't
>even gotten that right.)
>
>
>  
>
Actually webpages should probably be in xhtml.
xhtml is the standardised html (like ANSC is to C).
Most browsers aim to support xhtml webpages so that it looks the same on every browser.

Format:
http://www.vbxml.com/xhtml/articles/html_to_xhtml/default4.asp

Checker:
http://www.htmlvalidator.com/lite/

Brad Anderson wrote:
> Can you/Walter try to use HTML Tidy utility to clean up the original html docs?
> 
> http://tidy.sourceforge.net/
> 
Aaaaah! I was looking for something like this! Thx!

Walter wrote:

> "ssuukk" <ssuukk@.go2.pl> wrote in message
> news:buj6dr$2bq3$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>>>In some HTML editors you can insert a special field that will
>>>>automaticly update when you modify the document.
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't use an html editor, I use microemacs <g>.
>>>
>>
>>Unfortunately it shows: there are lots of unclosed tags,
> 
> 
> Hmm. Can you give me an example?
> 
Well - first off - unclosed <pre> in http://www.digitalmars.com/d/module.html

But anyway - if you use any of available online html validators/verifiers you will see a lot of complaints...

This one will be at least able to interpret this code and find unclosed phrases:

http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/

This won't process yout html at all because of missing html version specification...

http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/

I couldn't agree more.  XHTML transitional or strict - There is a brief description of the differences on http://www.w3schools.com.  There are still tags that are single, like <br />, but by and large, it is a more pure way to code a page.  I believe Tidy has settings to make code XHTML-compliant.  There is also the ability to make your own tags, and stylesheets obviously go hand-in-hand.

BA

J Anderson wrote:
> Walter wrote:
> 
>> "J C Calvarese" <jcc7@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:buke02$192q$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>>  
>>
>>> Walter wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>> "ssuukk" <ssuukk@.go2.pl> wrote in message
>>>> news:buj6dr$2bq3$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>>>> In some HTML editors you can insert a special field that will
>>>>>>> automaticly update when you modify the document.
>>>>>>>           
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't use an html editor, I use microemacs <g>.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately it shows: there are lots of unclosed tags,
>>>>>       
>>>>
>>>> Hmm. Can you give me an example?
>>>>     
>>>
>>> I think I can explain the unclosed tags issue, but I don't have a clue
>>> how important closed tags are to producing Latex.
>>>
>>> In order to get html to validate, virtually all tags need to be closed.
>>>  There are a few exceptions: <hr>, <br>, <img>, <meta>, (and more?). If
>>> a <tr> occurs, it would need to be matched with a </tr>.  Also, every
>>> <td> must be matched up with a </td>.  Apparently, ssuukk's program
>>> prefers somewhat valid html.
>>> I found an actual example in the second file I visually checked.
>>>
>>> I think he's referring to sections like this table (in arrays.html):
>>>
>>>     <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
>>> <tr><td>int* p; <td>Pointers to data
>>>
>>> <tr><td>int[3] s; <td>Static arrays
>>>
>>> <tr><td>int[] a; <td>Dynamic arrays
>>>
>>> <tr><td>int[char[]] x; <td>Associative arrays (discussed later)
>>>     </table>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Valid" html might look like this (in fact, any web browser will assume
>>> this is what you meant):
>>>
>>>     <table border=1 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0>
>>> <tr><td>int* p; </td><td>Pointers to data</td></tr>
>>>
>>> <tr><td>int[3] s; </td><td>Static arrays</td></tr>
>>>
>>> <tr><td>int[] a; </td><td>Dynamic arrays</td></tr>
>>>
>>> <tr><td>int[char[]] x; </td><td>Associative arrays (discussed
>>> </td>later)</tr>
>>>     </table>
>>>   
>>
>>
>> It's common practice to not bother with the redundant </td> and </tr>, and
>> if some html processor can't handle it, frankly, it's a bug in that
>> processor. (BTW, the html spec is hardly rigorous, I've found several
>> official conflicting definitions of what an html comment is. They haven't
>> even gotten that right.)
>>
>>
>>  
>>
> Actually webpages should probably be in xhtml.
> xhtml is the standardised html (like ANSC is to C).
> Most browsers aim to support xhtml webpages so that it looks the same on every browser.
> 
> Format:
> http://www.vbxml.com/xhtml/articles/html_to_xhtml/default4.asp
> 
> Checker:
> http://www.htmlvalidator.com/lite/
> 

"ssuukk" <ssuukk@.go2.pl> wrote in message news:bulevl$2tqv$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> This one will be at least able to interpret this code and find unclosed phrases:
>
> http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/

Thanks, I'll give that one a try.

> This won't process yout html at all because of missing html version specification...
>
> http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/

When I put the html version specification in, it complains then that I have an invalid <body> tag. Even though my use of the body tag matches their example. Oh well, I left off the version spec.

(I tried it on www.digitalmars.com/d/expression.html)