From: <tre...@gm...> - 2009-06-18 05:12:30
|
Consider the web page http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/ The subpage quickref.html is very old (Jan 2006), appears to have the wrong encoding (headers say latin-1, but bytes appear to be UTF-8 or something), and there's no associated .txt file. I suspect what has happened is that the source document became obsolete and was removed from the repository, but "make html" or whatever didn't remove this output target. If that's correct, the page ought to be removed, because it makes docutils look like a moribund project when people find (that page) when searching in google. 14:58 <offby1> not encouraging that that web site's encoding appears incorrectly :-| 14:59 <twb> offby1: hmm, it does? 14:59 <offby1> Mon, 23 Jän 2006 14:59 <offby1> note the umlaut 15:00 <offby1> no, http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickref.html 15:00 <twb> I suspect that sf.net forces the encoding to latin-1 15:01 <twb> But by all means report it :-) 15:01 <offby1> I'm unlikely to report a problem a) that minor b) for a page that proudly announces it's been abandoned for two and a half years |
From: Guenter M. <mi...@us...> - 2009-06-18 06:16:04
|
On 2009-06-18, Trent W. Buck wrote: > Consider the web page > http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/ The subpage > quickref.html is very old (Jan 2006), appears to have the wrong > encoding (headers say latin-1, but bytes appear to be UTF-8 or > something), and there's no associated .txt file. I suspect what > has happened is that the source document became obsolete and was > removed from the repository, but "make html" or whatever didn't > remove this output target. * this page is "hand-crafted" HTML, as it shows side-by-side examples in a manner that cannot (or could not at the time of creation) be achieved with reStructuredText. * shows that the reStructuredText syntax is fairly stable by now. Actually, while there is much development on the writer and extension side, the Docutils core did not change much since Jan 2006. However, the encoding error should be fixed, of course. > If that's correct, the page ought to > be removed, because it makes docutils look like a moribund project Much of the documentation makes Docutils look like ... but we are short on ressources. Günter |
From: Michael F. <fuz...@vo...> - 2009-06-18 11:24:43
|
Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2009-06-18, Trent W. Buck wrote: > >> Consider the web page >> http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/ The subpage >> quickref.html is very old (Jan 2006), appears to have the wrong >> encoding (headers say latin-1, but bytes appear to be UTF-8 or >> something), and there's no associated .txt file. I suspect what >> has happened is that the source document became obsolete and was >> removed from the repository, but "make html" or whatever didn't >> remove this output target. >> > > * this page is "hand-crafted" HTML, as it shows side-by-side examples in > a manner that cannot (or could not at the time of creation) be achieved > with reStructuredText. > > * shows that the reStructuredText syntax is fairly stable by now. > > Actually, while there is much development on the writer and extension > side, the Docutils core did not change much since Jan 2006. > > However, the encoding error should be fixed, of course. > Couldn't it be fixed with the right meta tag in the html document itself? My understanding is that where the html and server headers disagree on the encoding of a page browsers will honour what the page believes its encoding to be. Michael > >> If that's correct, the page ought to >> be removed, because it makes docutils look like a moribund project >> > > Much of the documentation makes Docutils look like ... > but we are short on ressources. > > Günter > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial > Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited > royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing > server and web deployment. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects > _______________________________________________ > Docutils-users mailing list > Doc...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/docutils-users > > Please use "Reply All" to reply to the list. > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog |
From: Marc 'B. R. <ma...@ri...> - 2009-06-19 06:57:01
|
On Thursday 18 June 2009, Michael Foord wrote: > My understanding is that where the html and server headers disagree > on the encoding of a page browsers will honour what the page believes > its encoding to be. Nope, the server's header "wins". Even if the author of an HTML document thinks he knows better in which encoding he wrote and saved the file. IMHO completely braindead. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- “You can bomb the world into pieces, but you can't bomb it into peace…” -- Michael Franti |
From: David G. <go...@py...> - 2009-06-18 11:56:46
|
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:15, Trent W. Buck<tre...@gm...> wrote: > Consider the web page > http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/ The subpage > quickref.html is very old (Jan 2006), Not very old, just very stable. > appears to have the wrong > encoding (headers say latin-1, but bytes appear to be UTF-8 or > something), That's because Subversion inserts UTF-8 in the date on systems where month abbreviations have accents. There's no other non-ASCII character in the entire file. But I changed the charset meta tag to UTF-8 to fix this. > and there's no associated .txt file. As noted, it's handcrafted HTML. The associated .txt file is intentionally missing. -- David Goodger <http://python.net/~goodger> |