Thu, 16 Sep 2010 03:15:54 -0500, Yao G. wrote: > On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 02:32:59 -0500, Lutger > <lutger.blijdest...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Just for reference, this is the easy way to start fixing sites if you >> don't know >> where to begin: >> >> http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http://d-programming- language.org/ >> >> The css validates 100%: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css- >> validator/validator?profile=css3&warning=2&uri=http://d-programming- >> language.org/ > > I had a hell of a time trying to make DDOC generate valid documentation. > It has a lot of inconsistencies or just plain weird and non-uniform ways > to treat some standard macros. I had to resort to define macros with > invalid markup, and those, assembled together would end up creating > valid HTML 4.01 Strict documents. Ironic, I know. Maybe is that I just > don't understand well how DDOC works. Go figure. > > Not to mention few weeks ago when I tried to generate valid XML/DocBook > files. I just gave up after a couple of hours. It's impossible. :(
Have you considered using the community driven doc gen? Was it 'dil' or something?