[pmwiki-users] Xhtml 1.0 Strict

kirpi at kirpi.it kirpi at kirpi.it
Thu Jul 10 09:43:05 CDT 2008


>> Patrick:
>> the markup engine aims to always output XHTML 1.0 Strict, so a skin that
>> specifies XHTML 1.0 Strict should be okay
>
>> Hans:
>> If you come up with any changes necessary to Triad skin please let me
>> know! Also with regards to make it more accessible.

Triad is possibly the best and most flexible skin we have (apart from
the default one, of course).
So I tesed today the default Triad page at the pmwiki.org site.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pmwiki.org%2Fwiki%2FCookbook%2FTriadSkin&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=XHTML+1.0+Strict&group=0
It seems that the Xhtml 1.0 Strict target is quite close!

- The "language" attribute in <script type='text/javascript'
language='JavaScript1.2'> could be easily amended, and avoiding it
will possibly be a common practice in the future.

- The <br clear='all' /> issue seems to be amendable with a {clear:
both} in the css. Most likely, it might go to the core pm css
definitions as it is of very common use.

- Would that target='_blank' issue be solved by simply avoiding the
use %newwin% in text? As Petko correctly wrote, the target='_blank'
attribute is not geared towards accessibility. The markup *does* prove
useful at times, and the functionality should be kept.
Simply, if one does not use it, the page should validate as Strict, am I wrong?

- There is a recurring error: Document type does not allow element
"input" here; missing one of "p", "h1", "h2", "h3", "h4", "h5", "h6",
"div", "pre", "address", "fieldset", "ins", "del" start-tag.
That is something I have no clue about.

If these issues are solved, most probably the Triad skin could easily
validate both as XHTML 1.0 Transitional and Strict, at will.

Luigi



More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list