Re: [PEAR-DOC] Target DTD for PEAR manual?

2011/11/5 Alexey Borzov <[email protected]>:
> 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