On Saturday 13 August 2005 11:55 am, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Darren Salt <linux@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk> [2005.08.13.1537 +0200]: > > >>> HTML 4.01. Is this a bug? Should I file a bug agains the b.d.o > > >>> psuedo > > >> > > >> Shouldn't it be XHTML nowadays? > > > > > > I personally would like to see them XHTML1.0 at least. [...] > > > > That or HTML 4.01; there's no real difference. > > HTML 4.01 is not yet deprecated, but it will be sooner or later. > Let's just do it right now rather than expecting someone to migrate > later. I vote for XHTML 1.1 Strict. Should be trivial in this case. This W3C validation page[1] for a sample bug, setting it to enforce XHTML 1.1, gives 40 errors, mostly broken tags (XHTML does not like capitalized tags, and there are some that don't self close). The file with code to be modified is debbugs/cgi/bugreport.cgi. I'd like to help with this, I have some experience with CGI scripts and XHTML/CSS and have already started making fixes in bugreport.cgi. Has this bug been filed so I have somewhere to start dropping patches? [1] http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fbugs.debian.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fbugreport.cgi%3Fbug%3D322812&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=XHTML+1.1 -- Ryan Schultz -> The meek shall indeed inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will take to the stars.
Attachment:
pgpS4fhUGiTtD.pgp
Description: PGP signature