diff options
| author | Waylan Limberg <waylan.limberg@icloud.com> | 2019-03-11 10:02:47 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Waylan Limberg <waylan.limberg@icloud.com> | 2019-03-11 10:02:47 -0400 |
| commit | d2cd9238c819ec972957d67572ade29f9296cc22 (patch) | |
| tree | 17cbcee5a2eba5ff94fd64ca57c3d585621056ea | |
| parent | 194b7d316ac4eaacfa4588023489fbafc038d7ca (diff) | |
| download | python-markdown-html.tar.gz | |
Round out tests of valid markup.html
There are some design desisions to make as noted in comments.
| -rw-r--r-- | tests/test_syntax/blocks/test_html_blocks.py | 234 |
1 files changed, 232 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/tests/test_syntax/blocks/test_html_blocks.py b/tests/test_syntax/blocks/test_html_blocks.py index 8c600a4..8bcdfd2 100644 --- a/tests/test_syntax/blocks/test_html_blocks.py +++ b/tests/test_syntax/blocks/test_html_blocks.py @@ -486,7 +486,18 @@ class TestHTMLBlocks(TestCase): '<!-- *foo* -->' ) - # TODO: Confirm this is correct + # TODO: Decide behavior here. Python-Markdown current outputs: + # + # <!-- *foo* --> + # <p><em>bar</em></p> + # + # But the reference implementation outputs: + # + # <p><!-- *foo* --><em>bar</em></p> + # + # As the raw HTML is not alone on the line, the reference implementation + # considers it inline rather than block level. The behavior defined in + # the test below is from the CommonMark spec, which we don't follow. def test_raw_comment_one_line_followed_by_text(self): self.assertMarkdownRenders( '<!-- *foo* -->*bar*', @@ -533,4 +544,223 @@ class TestHTMLBlocks(TestCase): ) ) - # TODO: processing instruction, declaration, CDATA... + def test_raw_comment_indented(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + self.dedent( + """ + <!-- + + *foo* + + --> + """ + ), + self.dedent( + """ + <!-- + + *foo* + + --> + """ + ) + ) + + def test_raw_processing_instruction_one_line(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + "<?php echo '>';' ?>", + "<?php echo '>';' ?>" + ) + + # This is inline as it is not on a line by itself. + def test_raw_processing_instruction_one_line_followed_by_text(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + "<?php echo '>';' ?>*bar*", + "<p><?php echo '>'; ' ?><em>bar</em></p>" + ) + + def test_raw_multiline_processing_instruction(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + self.dedent( + """ + <?php + echo '>';' + ?> + """ + ), + self.dedent( + """ + <?php + echo '>';' + ?> + """ + ) + ) + + def test_raw_processing_instruction_with_blank_lines(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + self.dedent( + """ + <?php + + echo '>';' + + ?> + """ + ), + self.dedent( + """ + <?php + + echo '>';' + + ?> + """ + ) + ) + + def test_raw_processing_instruction_indented(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + self.dedent( + """ + <?php + + echo '>';' + + ?> + """ + ), + self.dedent( + """ + <?php + + echo '>';' + + ?> + """ + ) + ) + + def test_raw_declaration_one_line(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + '<!DOCTYPE html>', + '<!DOCTYPE html>' + ) + + # TODO: Decide correct behavior. This matches current behavior and Commonmark. + # The reference implementation considers this inline not block level: + # + # <p><!DOCTYPE html><em>bar</em></p> + # + # But most implementations do this instead: + # + # <p><!DOCTYPE html><em>bar</em></p> + # + # Either makes sense, but the later seems more correct to me. + def test_raw_declaration_one_line_followed_by_text(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + '<!DOCTYPE html>*bar*', + '<!DOCTYPE html>*bar*' + ) + + def test_raw_multiline_declaration(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + self.dedent( + """ + <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC + "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd"> + """ + ), + self.dedent( + """ + <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC + "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd"> + """ + ) + ) + + def test_raw_cdata_one_line(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + '<![CDATA[ document.write(">"); ]]>', + '<![CDATA[ document.write(">"); ]]>' + ) + + # TODO: Decide correct behavior. This matches current behavior and Commonmark. + # The reference implementation considers this inline not block level: + # + # <p><![CDATA[ document.write(">"); ]]><em>bar</em></p> + # + # But most implementations do this instead: + # + # <p><[CDATA[ document.write(“>”); ]]><em>bar</em></p> + # + # Either makes sense, but the later seems more correct to me. + def test_raw_cdata_one_line_followed_by_text(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + '<![CDATA[ document.write(">"); ]]>*bar*', + '<![CDATA[ document.write(">"); ]]>*bar*' + ) + + def test_raw_multiline_cdata(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + self.dedent( + """ + <![CDATA[ + document.write(">"); + ]]> + """ + ), + self.dedent( + """ + <![CDATA[ + document.write(">"); + ]]> + """ + ) + ) + + def test_raw_cdata_with_blank_lines(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + self.dedent( + """ + <![CDATA[ + + document.write(">"); + + ]]> + """ + ), + self.dedent( + """ + <![CDATA[ + + document.write(">"); + + ]]> + """ + ) + ) + + def test_raw_cdata_indented(self): + self.assertMarkdownRenders( + self.dedent( + """ + <![CDATA[ + + document.write(">"); + + ]]> + """ + ), + self.dedent( + """ + <![CDATA[ + + document.write(">"); + + ]]> + """ + ) + ) |