https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55383
--- Comment #14 from Konstantin Preißer <prei...@web.de> --- Hi, I noticed that when viewing the doc XML source files from SVN over HTTP, like changlog.xml: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk/webapps/docs/changelog.xml then the CSS is not applied. Firefox logs an error about wrong MIME type (text/plain instead of text/css). This is probably because I forgot to set the correct MIME type on the .css stylesheet. I think the following change should fix it: Index: webapps/docs/images/docs-stylesheet.css =================================================================== --- webapps/docs/images/docs-stylesheet.css (revision 1517925) +++ webapps/docs/images/docs-stylesheet.css (working copy) Property changes on: webapps/docs/images/docs-stylesheet.css ___________________________________________________________________ Added: svn:mime-type ## -0,0 +1 ## +text/css \ No newline at end of property BTW, what do you think about switching from HTML to XHTML for the docs of Tomcat 8 (or next major release)? I mean: - change method attribute on the XSLT from "html" to "xml" - change file extension of generated output from ".html" to ".xhtml" - change output MIME type from "text/html" to "application/xhtml+xml" Comparing XHTML over HTML for XSLT-generated content, I currently see the following points: Pro: - The XSLT processor does not need to know how specific HTML elements should be outout. For example, <wbr> is a void element in HTML5, but currently the XSLT processor used by Ant/Java outputs <wbr></wbr>, which is wrong, as the XSLT processor does not yet implement the current XSLT and XQuery Serialization 3.0 spec [1]. However, when using XHTML, the browser also uses a XML parser and therefore XML Syntax can be used (both <wbr /> or <wbr></wbr> would be correct). This avoids the need for the XSLT processor to know how specific elements should be output (this also concerns elements like <style> and <script> which are output as CDATA in HTML). - One does not have to use the "about:legacy-compat" DOCTYPE (as work-around until the XSLT processor supports the XLST 3 spec), because in XHTML there is only "Full Standards Mode". Also, the old-style <meta> element which includes the encoding in a Content-Type declaration is not needed. Contra: - IE 9 (released: March 2011; IE 11 will be released soon) is the first IE to support XHTML, while all other supported browsers like Firefox, Chrome, Opera etc. support XHTML. IE 8 users will get a download dialog instead of the page displayed. Neutral: - Because the input (XML files and the XSLT file) is already XML and the output will be automatically generated, the output syntax (HTML or XHTML) is not of a concern when editing the source XML files. However, because the file extension would change from .html to .xhtml, such a step can probably only be done at a new major release as otherwise existing links to the pages would stop working. Using XHTML means that people which use IE 8 or older cannot view the pages. However, one could think that folks with old browsers stay with old Tomcat versions, and folks which use the newest Tomcat 8 also use a current IE. :D [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt-xquery-serialization-30/#HTML_DOCTYPE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
