FAQ
Hi,

I'm going to work a little bit on PhD_PEAR package to fix several obvious
problems with generated documentation (broken tables due to missing colspan /
rowspan, missing id attributes so #links don't work, etc).

Before I start this, I wanted to consult a bit about what DTD should be used for
generated docs.

I tried validating a page [1] from QuickForm2 docs with W3C validator [2]:
* If HTML5 doctype is used (it is currently used on the website) we get 97 errors
* If XHTML 1.0 Strict is forced, we only get 4 errors

The XHTML errors deal with block elements appearing in inline contexts and vice
versa. HTML5 errors deal with the same but also with obsolete <tt> tag and
<tr>'s valign attributes (it will require a generous amount of CSS changes to
fix these).

So, a question
1) Why are we using HTML5 doctype in the first place?
2) Should I try to fix output of PhD_PEAR to produce valid HTML5? Or valid XHTML?

BTW, right now chunked-XHTML format in PhD_PEAR uses XHTML 1.0 transitional and
big-XHTML uses HTML 4.01 transitional (these are the formats for downloaded
documentation).

[1] http://pear.php.net/manual/en/package.html.html-quickform2.rules.php
[2] http://validator.w3.org

Search Discussions

  • Brett Bieber at Nov 7, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    2011/11/5 Alexey Borzov <borz_off@cs.msu.su>:
    Hi,

    I'm going to work a little bit on PhD_PEAR package to fix several obvious
    problems with generated documentation (broken tables due to missing colspan
    / rowspan, missing id attributes so #links don't work, etc).
    Thanks for working on that.
    Before I start this, I wanted to consult a bit about what DTD should be used
    for generated docs.

    I tried validating a page [1] from QuickForm2 docs with W3C validator [2]:
    * If HTML5 doctype is used (it is currently used on the website) we get 97
    errors
    * If XHTML 1.0 Strict is forced, we only get 4 errors

    The XHTML errors deal with block elements appearing in inline contexts and
    vice versa. HTML5 errors deal with the same but also with obsolete <tt> tag
    and <tr>'s valign attributes (it will require a generous amount of CSS
    changes to fix these).
    tt should be code, correct? Converting the valign attributes into CSS
    doesn't sound like a daunting task, but work nonetheless.
    So, a question
    1) Why are we using HTML5 doctype in the first place?
    I recall Daniel sending a message to the pear-webmaster list with
    regards to the doctype for pearweb.

    http://news.php.net/php.pear.webmaster/6819
    2) Should I try to fix output of PhD_PEAR to produce valid HTML5? Or valid
    XHTML?
    I think we should target HTML5 validation.
    BTW, right now chunked-XHTML format in PhD_PEAR uses XHTML 1.0 transitional
    and big-XHTML uses HTML 4.01 transitional (these are the formats for
    downloaded documentation).

    [1] http://pear.php.net/manual/en/package.html.html-quickform2.rules.php
    [2] http://validator.w3.org

    --
    Brett Bieber

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppear-webmaster @
categoriesphp
postedNov 5, '11 at 9:13a
activeNov 7, '11 at 5:36p
posts2
users2
websitepear.php.net

2 users in discussion

Brett Bieber: 1 post Alexey Borzov: 1 post

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase