On Mar 15, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Hi Dave, *, > > probably one of my last messages on the list since I'll be gone with > the forwarder.. (so assume I will not read replies tomorrow/whenever > the switch is flipped) > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: >> On Mar 15, 2012, at 7:37 AM, Rob Weir wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: >>>> On Mar 15, 2012, at 12:22 AM, Regina Henschel wrote: >> [...] >>>>>> Well sort of. If you look at the actual document on the site >>>>>> you will probably find it contains an XHTML doctype even now. > > Old OOo pages were xhtml transitional, that is correct. And at least > the www.openoffice.org and de.openoffice.org pages were fully valid > (according to the w3c validator) > > CollabNet Enterprise Edition (that was used before Kenai, and after > SourceCast (the old name of older version of CollabNet Enterprise > Edition that was used even earlier) did as well ignore the doctype and > other meta-tags, but merged title and meta tags into the overall > templating system. > So all pages were delivered as xhtml - of course that didn't make them > valid, but that means that they worked for the users and editors with > that doctype. > >> [...] >> I think that ssi.mdtext should add a line like: >> >> doctype: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 >> Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd";> > > Please don't turn back the wheel of time. If you want to make a > unification, then I suggest you either user xhtml transitional, or > make the step to html5 right away as default.
Thanks. In my limited testing yesterday the W3C validator very much liked HTML5. Regards, Dave > > ciao > Christian
