discuss: css test documents
Subject:
Re: css test documents
From:
"Chris Karakas" ####@####.####
Date:
1 Apr 2004 18:43:24 -0000
Message-Id: <200404011842.i31Igv428947@mailgate5.web.de>
Emma Jane Hogbin ####@####.#### schrieb am 01.04.04 16:29:43:
>
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 03:08:57PM +0200, Chris Karakas wrote:
> > Emma Jane Hogbin ####@####.#### schrieb am 30.03.04 22:40:11:
> > > While we're at it, the HTML is awful. What was used as the transformation
> > > tool? At a bare minimum we need to get the Document Type Declaration onto
> > > the top of the HTML files...
> >
> > I have covered this topic in:
> > http://www.karakas-online.de/mySGML/html-validation.html
>
> You've talked about HTML validation, which is great. But that was not my
> question.
Oh, please.
You said:
> > > At a bare minimum we need to get the Document Type Declaration onto
> > > the top of the HTML files...
and I said:
> > I have covered this topic in:
> > http://www.karakas-online.de/mySGML/html-validation.html
So, now let's see if I did cover this topic in that link. There, we read:
*************************************************************
The W3C is maintaining a HTML validator service at The W3C
Validator. If you try it using various URLs from pages on the Internet
that were created using the methods described in this document
(i.e. DocBook SGML , sgmltools, jade etc.), you may be surprised
that so many of them will return the following error from W3C when
validated:
I was not able to extract a character encoding labeling from
any of the valid sources for such information. Without encoding
information it is impossible to validate the document.
This is because their authors did not take the trouble to examine
the created HTML documents and enhance them to conform to
the HTML standards. There is, in fact, some amount of work involved,
if you want your HTML documents to obey the standards set by the
W3C - but this work too is automated in the scripts presented here!
Let's have a look how this is done:
The above error from the W3C HTML Validator comes from the
fact that the documents, as produced by sgmltools and the configuration
settings discussed so far, do not include something like
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
But even if they did, the all-important DOCTYPE statement
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
would also be missing, making validation against a HTML DTD impossible.
This may be a deliberate "feature" of the tools involved in the document
creation chain. But it also may have its root to an option that went unnoticed
by me throughout the time! If you happen to know of such an option
(perhaps in the HTML stylesheet?), please don't hesitate to contact me.
*************************************************************
So, did I cover the missing DOCTYPE statement or not?
You see, I've been there already.
I also give the answer to your question: that this behaviour indeed comes from the "tools" we use, as unbelievable as it is.
And I also present the solution.
> LyX is not one of the accepted formats by the LDP. I'm sure you'll find
> plenty of reasons why we don't use it in the archive.
>
Oh, that's why my PHP-Nuke HOWTO, which is written completely in LyX was not accepted...
You miss my point: the user will use LyX to write the document, because LyX is much easier to use, has a GUI and a WYSIWYM philosophy. Then, he will use my scripts to transform it to SGML.
Then he will send this SGML to TLDP - as I did with the PHP-Nuke HOWTO and it *was* accepted.
The TLDP will use its own processing scripts - since it does not want to use mine - and will produce the crappy HTML you see there - then a new thread about "How could this happen?", "Did Openjade do this?", "Why don't our documents get validated at W3C?" etc. will appear here.
In the meantime, the user will have used my scripts to produce *valid* (including missing DOCTYPE), accessible (try to pass Bobb's accessibility tests on TLDP's HTML) and beautifully formatted (using a CSS specially tailored to DocBook) documents, which he will publish on his own website, not bothering if and when the LDP will recognize the problem and its solution.
The user will keep the LyX file for himself. TLDP will see only SGML. What both will do out of the SGML file is their business of course - as we see in the above example.
But don't tell me that I didn't cover these things. I've stumbled over them already, I've solved them (and many others, such as Mathematics and Bibliographic Databases with refdb) and I described the solution.
I repeat my proposal that this solution be suggested to the authors as an alternative one in the Author's Guide.
Chris
--
Regards
Chris Karakas
http://www.karakas-online.de
_____________________________________________________________________
Der WEB.DE Virenschutz schuetzt Ihr Postfach vor dem Wurm Beagle.A-J!
Kostenfrei fuer FreeMail Nutzer. http://f.web.de/?mc=021158
