Talk:Text to HTML: Difference between revisions
→Too broad
Line 8:
:: It is going to be difficult to compare implementations if none of them are doing the same thing. And, for example, the open ended concept of "plain text tables" pretty much guarantees that any implementation which does not ignore that part of the task will be different from any other implementation where a "copy of implementation" relationship does not exist. A lack of examples will also make comparison difficult. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 18:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
::: doesn't that depend on what level you compare? even with exact input and output requirements, how do you compare solutions when one uses regexps and the other uses a state machine? the algorithms will be completely different. as tasks get more complex the comparability will have to be on a higher level. in this task the highest level of comparison is: plain text goes in, html comes out. examples will surely help, but i think these too need to come out of this discussion. once we can agree on a reasonable set of requirements, we can create a few input examples to test the requirements on.--[[User:EMBee|eMBee]] 02:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
:::: I was assuming that the results would be comparable. So, for example, if one implementation treats hanging indentation as a paragraph format, another treats it as a list format and a third and fourth treats that case as a table (one as a single row table, another as a table with one row per line of plain text), what would we be comparing? Or, as an extreme case (emulating fixed width presentation despite the possible absence of any fixed-width fonts) I might represent plain text as a (borderless) table with one cell per character (and all the characters in the original which represent a url would have a link to the corresponding url). --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 14:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
== Concrete requirements? ==
| |||