Re: Authoring Tools WAS: Switching to XML

On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 04:34:06PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com> writes:
> > On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 14:58, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> It would be more accurate to say that we have not identified a
> >> WYSWYG tool which does not mess up the source.  There may be one,
> >> it would just take a fair amount of testing to find it.
>
> > Is this strictly a question of indentation, or one of actually
> > mangling tags and such?
>
> What we need is something that does not change regions of the file
> that the user did not intend to modify.  I think
> horizonal-white-space-only changes could be worked around if the
> user is careful to use diff --ignore-space-change when submitting
> the patch, but I suspect that an editor that thinks it can mangle
> whitespace will also figure that it can change line boundaries, and
> then diff will never be able to extract any signal from that noise.

Could post-processing with tidy clean this up?  I'm pretty sure that
tidy's output is deterministic, at least if the editor hasn't mangled
tags...

Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778        AIM: dfetter666
                              Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!