Using lyxhtml_validity.py

[Kornel Benko]

Am Fri, 13 Jan 2023 15:09:21 -0500
schrieb Scott Kostyshak <skostysh at lyx.org>:

> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 06:16:48PM +0100, Kornel Benko wrote:
> > Am Fri, 13 Jan 2023 11:28:55 -0500
> > schrieb Scott Kostyshak <skostysh at lyx.org>:
> >   
> > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 06:55:11AM +0100, Kornel Benko wrote:  
> > > > Am Wed, 11 Jan 2023 01:12:40 +0100
> > > > schrieb Thibaut Cuvelier <dourouc05 at gmail.com>:
> > > >     
> > > > > > Still
> > > > > >         Error: Bad value "content-type" for attribute "http-equiv" on element
> > > > > > "meta".
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Should we ignore this error?
> > > > > >     
> > > > > I don't think we should ignore it. It really seems to be platform-dependent
> > > > > (either due to LyX or the HTML validator). I really can't reproduce locally,
> > > > > even when running the test through CTest (log attached for Intro.lyx). However,
> > > > > when uploading my file to https://validator.nu/#file, I get the error message.
> > > > >   
> > > > 
> > > > I suppose the call to validate is still commented out in your export.cmake?
> > > > I have now enabled the call at 88087a3c, now that the test passes here too.
> > > > Thanks for your work.    
> > > 
> > > Thanks to both of you on making progress on these tests. Still a lot of
> > > tests fail for me. Is it OK to comment out the check_xhtml_validate()
> > > line until the tests are passing for all of us? Otherwise it's hard for
> > > me to figure out which failures are due to regressions.
> > > 
> > > Scott  
> > 
> > Yes, valid point. My intention was to have it enabled so that Thibaut can see failed
> > tests without thinking on enabling them first.  
> 
> I see. In this case maybe we can enable them on a separate branch until
> things are figured out.
> 
> > But the distribution should have them
> > disabled, since the need for html5validator is not handled appropriately.  
> 
> I think we disable the tests by default anyway in the distributed release.
> 
> > Anyway, you have the last word on it.  
> 
> Let's keep them enabled another week to see if you and Thibaut figure
> out the failures, and if not then disable them in a week, say 21 January?
> Is this compromise acceptable to you?
> 
> Scott

Yes, thanks.

	Kornel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.lyx.org/pipermail/lyx-devel/attachments/20230113/1334bbca/attachment.asc>