oasegips / sigil

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/sigil
GNU General Public License v3.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

Making a list creates extraneous code #2323

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Please read http://code.google.com/p/sigil/wiki/ReportingIssues for
information about submitting a good bug report.

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Highlight a set of paragraphs in book view. (clean code, all <p></p> tagged)
2. Click either the ordered list or unordered list button
3. Switch to code view.
...

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
I expect the code to be clean, like this:
<ul>
<li>One</li>
<li>Two</li>
<li>Three</li>
</ul>

What I get is this:
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: 0.9em;">One</span><br /></li>
<li><span style="font-size: 0.9em;">Two</span><br /></li>
<li><span style="font-size: 0.9em;">Three</span><br /></li>
</ul>

I do not want the span or the style modification, and I have nothing in my 
style sheet that suggests it should be there. Also, the <br /> tags are silly 
and pointless.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
0.7.2, but it happened on previous versions as well. I've lived with this for a 
while. Multiple installations of Sigil on multiple operating systems (Win and 
OSX) and at least three computers. It occurs even with a fresh installation on 
a brand new file.

Please provide any additional information below. If your source file is
required to fully understand the problem, please attach it to this issue.
Read the Reporting Issues wiki page before submitting!
Obviously, I can do a find/replace to get rid of the extra code, but that takes 
time and I'm always worried I'm going to muck something up in the process. I 
would rather it just didn't do that.

Thank you,
Peter

Original issue reported on code.google.com by ppoll...@gmail.com on 16 Jul 2013 at 8:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
This code is generated by the Qt editor and can't be changed at least not 
easily.

Original comment by daveheil...@gmail.com on 16 Jul 2013 at 8:49