Re: [Python-markdown-discuss] XHTML or HTML?

[Waylan L. <wa...@gm...>]

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Yuri Takhteyev <qar...@gm...> wrote:
>> We could, but if "method" is what ElementTree is already using, then
>> I'd suggest staying with it. No sense repainting the bikeshed. In
>> fact, if I had realized that, I wouldn't even have asked.
>
> Not sure if I buy this reason. The name that may make sense in the
> context of ElementTree may not make sense in the context of Markdown.
> A typical user doesn't even need to know we are using ElementTree. We
> should pick a name that makes sense to us.

True, now that you mention it. But XHTML is not HTML so "html_version"
doesn't work from that perspective. How about "output_format"? It's
descriptive and doesn't restrict us to html and variants. Hows that
for future proof?

>
>> How about "html4" & "xhtml1"? Do we really need the extra .1?
>> Actually, after sending my last email, it occurred to me that we could
>> easily allow for a few alternatives. Something like:
>>
>>    if method in ['html', 'html4', 'html_4']:
>
> We can use underscores or not, but I wouldn't support both, because
> this would invite confusion. I would, however, provide "html" and
> "xhtml" as shortcuts. So, perhaps ['html', 'html4'] and ['xhtml',
> 'xhtml1']. If we later decide to support xhtml 2.0 and make it the
> default, we can have one handler for ['xhtml1'] and another one for
> ['xhtml', 'xhtml2'].

Sounds good to me. I'm inclined to document the choices as "xhtml" and
"html4". Or would you prefer "xhtml1" to be the documented choice?

>
>> ElementTree is licensed BSD. I was intending to add a copyright to the
>> top of the file attributing it accordingly. That should be good
>> enough, but, when I'm ready to merge it, I'll fire an email off to
>> Fredrik with a copy attached for good measure.
>
> Where did you find this? The license that accompanies the last release
> (1.2.7) and shows up svn
> (http://svn.effbot.org/public/elementtree/README) is vaguely BSD-ish,
> but is not quite BSD, and appears to prohibit redistribution for a
> fee. Did they change it since?

Hmm, I thought I checked this when discussing it with Eric the other
week. I looked at the license right in the source file on the 1.3
preview branch [1] that we're pulling the code from. But your right,
that's not BSD.

The only potentially concerning part is "without fee". We won't be
charging a fee. Although, the BSD license does allow distribution for
a fee. So someone could conceivably charge a fee for Python-Markdown -
in which case they would not be able to include the html4.py file.

[1]: http://svn.effbot.org/public/elementtree-1.3/elementtree/ElementTree.py

-- 
----
\X/ /-\ `/ |_ /-\ |\|
Waylan Limberg