discuss: css test documents
Subject:
Re: css test documents
From:
Emma Jane Hogbin ####@####.####
Date:
1 Apr 2004 19:17:27 -0000
Message-Id: <20040401191609.GH3968@smeagol>
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 08:42:57PM +0200, Chris Karakas wrote:
> 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...
> > >
> > You've talked about HTML validation, which is great. But that was not my
> > question.
>
> Oh, please.
Please re-read the paragraph above. The question is "What was used as the
transformation tool?"
We both know that the DTD is not included by the *transformation tool*
that's why I'm trying to figure out if the fault lies with our version of
the DSSSL/XSLT style sheets.
> 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.
We both know it's a problem, I'm trying to figure out how to fix the
problem so that the DTD is included by our scripts. The question, however,
was not about validation, it's about the transformation tools and WHY they
omit the DTD. You have not answered that in your document, you only
acknowledge that it is a problem! The problem needs to be fixed at the
source with the original authors of the DocBook transformation tools.
*That's* what I'm trying to work on right now.
I know I must come across as being really stupid. I'm sorry about that.
I'm actually quite knowledgeable when it comes to both CSS and XHTML.
> > 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...
I have no idea why your document wasn't accepted. I was not one of the
reviewers for that document. Do you have the emails outlining why your
document was rejected? Later in this email you say it was accepted? I
notice the document was first accepted in January 2003. This is before I
was a member of the review team. Certainly I would not have rejected a
document based on its markup. Instead I would have added the markup for
the author.
emma
--
Emma Jane Hogbin
[[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]
