Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 07:19:50 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@FreeBSD.org> Cc: www@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: XHTML and the website Message-ID: <20030407071950.61a3d035.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030406230307.GA33473@intruder.bmah.org> References: <20030405151719.GA75703@submonkey.net> <20030406230307.GA33473@intruder.bmah.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 6 Apr 2003 16:03:07 -0700 "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org> wrote: > If memory serves me right, Ceri Davies wrote: > > > In August last year, a commit was made to change the website to XHTML, and > > since then, all the documents built from SGML have been happily announcing > > in their DOCTYPE declaration that they are XHTML 1.0 Transitional. > > However, with the exception of the front page of the web site, they aren't; > > none of them validate. > > I might note that all of the documents in our documentation set also > claim to be XHTML. I wonder about them? If they're compliant, fixing > *them* might be kind of hard since a lot of the XHTML is generated > from the toolchain. Generated from tidy using the flags we have. Wonder what other options we can use here. :) /me backs away > > Like Murray, the cost/benefit ratio is a little hazy to me, but I'd > say as long as you're willing, and it doesn't break anything, go for > it. Well this was originally done for the purpose of working with a wide variety of www browsers. Thats the only reason I cared to do it in the first place. If its not helping, or there is no real change, then we can just back it out and look at another solution. -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030407071950.61a3d035.trhodes>