Pandoc clobbers span closing ">" when containing html

[cboettig]

When encountering a span element in markdown such as:

<span class="some-class" title="some _title_">_usually_</span>

Pandoc correctly parses this without clobbering the internal data, giving the html:

<p><span class="some-class" title="some _title_"><em>span text</em></span></p>

If the span element contains html closing tags inside its element, the closing span tag is clobbered by parser:

this markdown:

<span class="some-class" data-html="true" title="some <em>title</em>">But _not_ if those elements contain HTML. </span>

becomes this html

<p><span class="some-class" data-html="true" title="some <em>title</em>&quot;&gt;But <em>not</em> if those elements contain HTML. </span></p>

Note that the close of span element has been parsed into ">

The use of html inside a span element may be unusual, but I do not think it is incorrect. I use this with twitter-bootstrap tooltips, where it is explicitly supported by the data-html="true" option. (A utility embeds the tooltips, which I use for citations, into what is otherwise blog entry written in markdown).

Thanks for considering this arcane use case.

[jgm]

This is invalid HTML. The < character MUST be escaped inside attributes.

http://www.w3.org/TR/html-markup/syntax.html#syntax-attribute-value

Garbage in, garbage out.

[jgm]

Note: This means that < should be escaped even inside a data-html attribute. The twitter gizmo that is consuming this should, if properly designed, automatically unescape it.

[cboettig]

Thanks for clarifying this use, and my apologies for the mistake!

---

Carl Boettiger
http://carlboettiger.info

sent from mobile device; my apologies for any terseness or typos
On Apr 18, 2013 9:35 AM, "John MacFarlane" notifications@github.com wrote:

Note: This means that < should be escaped even inside a data-htmlattribute. The twitter gizmo that is consuming this should, if properly
designed, automatically unescape it.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/831#issuecomment-16587699
.