Re: Target DTD for PEAR manual?

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