Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 67322
Change Website Type back to transitional
Last modified: 2012-01-29 22:52:06 UTC
Hello @all, with the current CEE all pages of openoffice.org get the type: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" as default. Please stop this and use <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" again. Why? * With strict You can't use such things as named <form> tags (used with the most of our script for Download eg.). * You have to change the style of all pages with formated tables or fonts to css because with strict You cant use atributes like width or height in <table> or color with the tag font ... and so on and so on!!! At the moment only some pages on de.openoffice.org are valid, www.openoffice.org is not :-( You can check this out here: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://de.openoffice.org http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.openoffice.org http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://download.openoffice.org http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://documentation.openoffice.org Who has time to revalidate all this pages? Thats why I will remove the w3c-Logo from all Pages on de.openoffice.org and stop validating our pages. Regards Marko Moeller
added jrahemipour to CC
Isn't it it possible to have an answer on this after four weeks? As we are one of the biggest opensource-projects we _should_ have valid pages.
Hello @all, Take (again) a look at: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.openoffice.org%2F Only one sentence: It's a shame! If now one is willing to turn the site back to transitional You should fix the site content and make it (strict) valid! That is it what I said. We can talk about this for weeks and month but there must are people who are willing to do the job! I say ist again. I am able to do it and I know the needed tools!!! I will create new pages with strict but I don't want to validate all other pages again! Keep in mind: There are a lot of pages on several OOo sites (it is easy to say make it strict if You have to do it for about ten pages but not for more than hundred!) and there is no !!! benefit we get! BTW: The German start page is valid. Regards Marko
.
Hi Thank you for contacting CollabNet Customer Support. Based on the information that has been provided to us, we will initiate our research & provide you an update as soon as we have adequate information. Thanks, Sridhar Support Operations
Hi I am discussing this issue internally, will provide you an update as soon as i have adequate information. Thanks Sridhar Support Operations
Hello Sridhar, Thank Yoy for having a look at this issue. Regards Marko
Adding myself.
Hi Our Engineers had a view at this request and confirmed that this could be done by site branding, but we found the given format is invalid due to the reasons below > The given Doctype to use <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" which is not possible to use XHTML Public name with a Transitional DTD >It can be done with <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" The modified DTD definition is from W3C school Steps to reproduce Checkout the look project www/overrides/templates and modify the PreServlet.vm <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> to <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> Kindly let us know to proceed further. Regards, Sridhar Support Operations
Thank You for Your explanation. I'll forward it to the website team, cause I have not tehe rights to do this. Regards Marko
So the question is not so much how to change the doctype. The point is to come to a decision whether we would like to change it.
Hi st, Stefan, please be honest. In my mind it was a fault from the beginning. Is there any (good) reason to keep the pages on strict? If this should be I will open another Issue: "Please make the content of OpenOffice.org w3c strict valid" To hold on an ugly type and dont use it or validate the main pages for this doc type makes no sense, pardon me, that is nonsens! Take a look at the posted links please and then tell me who is willing to validate them to strict. I have stopped validation for the German pages at the moment, cause I hat it to spent time for work and then kick it to trash. If this problem is fixed, I'll be happy to validate the rest of the pages. And another reason: There was no (!) discussion or decision to change the type from transitional to strict. In my mind it is only a simple fix for a fault. Kind regards Marko
Facts: IssueZilla doesn't create valid xhtml-strict. IssueZilla will not be changed to xhtml-strict. (see issue 67382 ) Thus: keeping strict doesn't make sense. The point being is: CollabNet changed the doctype to strict during the upgrade. We previously had changed it to xhtml-transitional when the mainpage was redesigned. Now changed it back, setting the issue to fixed.
verified and closing... As cloph correctly described the change was a result of the upgrade visible quite a while on the staging server. And we could decide either way - work towards "strict" (except IZ) or stay with "transitional". I'm fine with switching back to transitional. But do we ever plan to transition?