Re: An HTML Announcement of perl-5.12.0 on The Perl Foundation Blog

[Andy Lester]

On Apr 22, 2010, at 11:53 AM, Shlomi Fish wrote:

> yourself." (see http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/fortunes/osp_rules.html ), I
> am willing to do most of the work, but I'll need to know the desired format in
> advance and some people will have to proofread my copy.

I'm certainly glad to run an HTMLified version on Perlbuzz.

--
Andy Lester => an...@petdance.com => www.theworkinggeek.com => AIM:petdance

[Shlomi Fish]

Hi all!

So far the only announcement of perl-5.12.0 has been to the perl5-porters
mailing as plaintext E-mail. It was copied in LWN.net:

http://lwn.net/Articles/383203/

But it's still mostly plaintext there. A Google search for perl-5.12.0 yields
no good result for an HTML announcement. I think we should announce it by
formatting it into HTML and publish it on the TPF (= Perl Foundation) blog.
True to my words that "Don't whine unless you are going to implement it

yourself." (see http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/fortunes/osp_rules.html ), I
am willing to do most of the work, but I'll need to know the desired format in
advance and some people will have to proofread my copy.

Any comments? Who should I contact? I don't see any contact information on
http://news.perlfoundation.org/ (which should also be remedied as soon as
humanly possible.)

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
Interview with Ben Collins-Sussman - http://shlom.in/sussman

Deletionists delete Wikipedia articles that they consider lame.
Chuck Norris deletes deletionists whom he considers lame.

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

[Gabor Szabo]

http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl5/index.cgi?news_perl_5_12
has a collection of links to the announcements about 5.12
in various languages.

Please update the page with link to further announcements.

Gabor

[Shlomi Fish]

Hi Eric,

On Thursday 22 Apr 2010 20:14:49 Eric Brine wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Shlomi Fish <shl...@iglu.org.il> wrote:
> > Hi all!
> >
> > So far the only announcement of perl-5.12.0 has been to the perl5-porters
> > mailing as plaintext E-mail. It was copied in LWN.net:
> >
> > http://lwn.net/Articles/383203/
> >
> > But it's still mostly plaintext there. A Google search for perl-5.12.0
> > yields
> > no good result for an HTML announcement. I think we should announce it by
> > formatting it into HTML and publish it on the TPF (= Perl Foundation)
> > blog. True to my words that "Don't whine unless you are going to
> > implement it yourself." (see

> > http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/fortunes/osp_rules.html), I am willing

> > to do most of the work, but I'll need to know the desired format in
> > advance and some people will have to proofread my copy.
>

> I HTMLised the announcements when I post them to PerlMonks.
>
> http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=834384
>

Nice.

> The HTML is:
>

Thanks for providing it. However, it is not XHTML/XML-compliant and so will
require some work. Still may be better than nothing. Maybe HTML tidy will be
able to easily whip it up to shape.

Is this HTML required by Perlmonks, or did you write it like that out of a
different reason?

Regards,

-- Shlomi Fish

[SNIP HTML]

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/

What does "Zionism" mean? - http://shlom.in/def-zionism

[Shlomi Fish]

On Friday 23 Apr 2010 18:40:38 Eric Brine wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 5:49 AM, Shlomi Fish <shl...@iglu.org.il> wrote:
> > Thanks for providing it. However, it is not XHTML/XML-compliant
>

> Correct, HTML is not compatible with XHTML.
>

It is not completely (as far as standalone tags are concerned at least), but
you can at least close opened tags, etc. which you've neglected to do. I'm not
sure even HTML 4.0 still allows stray opening tags (such as <p> or <td> or
whatever).

> In fact, I couldn't make it make it compliant with both HTML and XHTML
> because I used HR.

What is HR in this context?

>
> > Is this HTML required by Perlmonks, or did you write it like that out of a
>
> > different reason?
>

> "this HTML"?

I meant HTML like the one you've written (see above).

Regards and have a happy weekend,

Shlomi Fish

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/

Optimising Code for Speed - http://shlom.in/optimise

[Denny]

On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 19:53 +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> So far the only announcement of perl-5.12.0 has been to the perl5-porters
> mailing as plaintext E-mail. It was copied in LWN.net:
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/383203/

Also here:
http://perlisalive.com/articles/42

Regards,
Denny

[Mark Mielke]

Interesting on exactly why "<hr />" shows up as invalid in validators.
Apparently I and most browser writes never learned about the SGML short
tag capability. Perhaps, because we always thought of HTML as something
that was *like* SGML, but definitely not actual SGML. :-)

I think it is a bit odd to have the validator implement different rules
than common browsers. Not sure which is wrong or how to fix this...

I think I'll still use <hr />, as it works as intended. It is valid
XHTML, which means it works in new browsers with the right headers, and
it is valid HTML in old browsers (whether they are spec compliant or not).

Thanks for the reference though - it was worth the read.

Cheers,
mark

On 04/26/2010 04:13 AM, Philip Potter wrote:
> On 25 April 2010 22:53, Mark Mielke<ma...@mark.mielke.cc> wrote:
>
>> On 04/25/2010 04:44 PM, Eric Brine wrote:
>>
>>> The combined open close tags such as<hr/> should be used with a
>>> space before the / to make sure it works on old and new browsers.
>>>
>>> Try:<hr />
>>>
>>>
>>> That's not valid HTML.
>>>
>> What is invalid about it? The "/" gets interpretted as an unrecognized
>> attribute. Do you mean formal HTML without support for extensions via new
>> attributes? Which HTML or XHTML parsers do you know that will break with<hr
>> />?
>>
> Does the w3 validator count?
> The HTML strict validator treats<hr /> as an error:
> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.doc.ic.ac.uk%2F~pgp%2Fwrong-s.html
> The HTML transitional validator throws up a warning for<hr />:
> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.doc.ic.ac.uk%2F~pgp%2Fwrong-t.html
>
> The reason is explained here:
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/empty.html
>
> tl;dr version:<hr /> in HTML means<hr>> -- that is, an<hr> tag
> followed by a greater-than sign. Almost no browser displays it this
> way; but HTML validators *do* interpret it this way. If anything,
> using<hr/> to mean<hr> is a nonstandard but common extension. I'm
> not sure if<hr/> will induce quirks mode in browsers.
>
> Phil
>
>

[Shlomi Fish]

On Friday 23 Apr 2010 18:40:38 Eric Brine wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 5:49 AM, Shlomi Fish <shl...@iglu.org.il> wrote:

> > Thanks for providing it. However, it is not XHTML/XML-compliant
>

> Correct, HTML is not compatible with XHTML.
>

> In fact, I couldn't make it make it compliant with both HTML and XHTML
> because I used HR.
>

> Is this HTML required by Perlmonks, or did you write it like that out of a
>
> > different reason?
>

> "this HTML"?

In any case, here is XHTML 1.1 version of Eric's HTML:

http://www.shlomifish.org/p5.12.0-ann/

I converted it to XHTML using HTML tidy and some manual tweaks. Please reuse
it on blogs.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/

"Humanity" - Parody of Modern Life - http://shlom.in/humanity

God considered inflicting XSLT as the tenth plague of Egypt, but then
decided against it because he thought it would be too evil.

[Andy Lester]

On Apr 28, 2010, at 11:30 AM, Shlomi Fish wrote:

> I converted it to XHTML using HTML tidy and some manual tweaks. Please reuse
> it on blogs.

Done and published to Perlbuzz. Thanks!

http://perlbuzz.com/2010/04/perl-512-released-perl-5-under-new-release-process.html

xoxo,
Andy