Justin Cormack wrote:
>
> On 15 Nov 2005, at 01:21, Andrew Gray wrote:
>> Signatures that are broken are, in most cases, sloppy coding that was
>> previously shored up by our parser, I think. However, a lot of other
>> issues aren't bad coding (at least, not on the surface); there's
>> issues with HTML in transcluded templates, for example, which no-one
>> seems sure about; these may be template coding flaws or they may be a
>> problem with the backup code.
>>
>> I really don't know anything more than what I've just been reading,
>> though...
>
> Its the template thing: it was [[Portal:London]] I saw which has lots.
> Quite
> prepared to believe that there were errors to start with; the current
> state
> looks like a pretty major change though, so it doesnt seem worth fixing
> until they have reverted to something that is going to stay stable. If
> there are problems it would be good to have checking tools on input, or
> more markup to replace common html uses (html in sigs is rather evil
> as it
> cant be cleaned up after if wrong which is rather gross and this
> should really
> be fixed).
>
> Justinc
>
> _
Maybe templates should be HTML-cleaned as independent entities before
transclusion / substitution into the larger page? Or would that not work
because the code doesn't work that way, or break existing uses?
-- Neil