Wanrong Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sorry, actually we were talking about different things. Maybe because we
> have different understandings of the bug itself. Just want to clarify
> the bug a little bit.
>
> Actually, the bug is *NOT* concerned about how the HTML code looks, it
> is concern
Bastien wrote:
Wanrong Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thanks for testing. Surely the No.1 priority is to have correct HTML
syntax. But I think how the page looks comes very close as a second
priority.
I'm not sure we're speaking about the same thing: I was speaking about
the HTML *s
Wanrong Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for testing. Surely the No.1 priority is to have correct HTML
> syntax. But I think how the page looks comes very close as a second
> priority.
I'm not sure we're speaking about the same thing: I was speaking about
the HTML *source code*, not the H
Bastien wrote:
Hi Wanrong,
Wanrong Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Finally, I decided to learn some elisp debugging techniques and as a
practice, it seems I found the bug and fixed it with this patch (against
org.el in 5.16b)
@@ -24437,7 +24437,7 @@
(when (re-search-backward
Hi Wanrong,
Wanrong Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Finally, I decided to learn some elisp debugging techniques and as a
> practice, it seems I found the bug and fixed it with this patch (against
> org.el in 5.16b)
>
> @@ -24437,7 +24437,7 @@
> (when (re-search-backward
>
