[docbook-apps] Validating output XHTML was Re: [docbook-apps] Re: Bug #849312 shade.verbatim not working in programlistingco

[Emma Jane Hogbin <emmajane at xtrinsic dot com>]

On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 10:23:42AM -0800, Bob Stayton wrote:
> If you are finding XHTML validation errors, can you collect them and send
> them along? 

What's the best way to do this? Line numbers from the source? or Elements
that aren't getting properly transformed, or something else? Should it go
in as a bug over at source forge?

> Are you validating against Strict XHTML?  

I'm validating the pages against whatever the output DTD is--HTML 4 gets 
validated as HTML 4, XHTML Transitional 1.0 gets validated as that (etc). 
I believe most of the XHTML pages are spit out as Transitional? I don't 
mind if it's Transitional or Strict, although I tend to write Strict XHTML 
inside of a Transitional DTD just in case I need to slip back into The Old
Way for a few minutes.

> Also, you probably
> have some suggestions for generating clean XHTML suitable for styling with a
> separate CSS stylesheet.

I've followed a fair amount of the discussion regarding how best to do the
markup. I would personally do the following:
	- use a bold font-weight where appropriate, but not the <b> tag,
	- <strong> should /not/ be used as a replacement for <b>. It should be
	  used to emphasize text. Basically <em> is a little emphasized and
	  <strong> is a more emphasized <em>. A screen reader will speak <em>
	  and <strong> in a different voice. You don't want all of the code
	  shouted out just because it's better to have it visually bold on the
	  screen!
	- use the best match in HTML for a given DocBook tag. There were a few
	  good lists passed around; for anything that is not an exact match
	  (this will be most things) also add a
	  		class="docbooktagname docbookattributename"
	  having something space something else allows you to make a selection
	  in the CSS based on either part of the list.
	  		http://css.maxdesign.com.au/selectutorial/selectors_attribute.htm
	  It is not perfectly supported at this point, but I think you'll find
	  that the class="docbooktagname" part will still work.
	- the option to provide "style-free" markup is good.
	- the styles, wherever possible, should not be embedded in the document
	  but rather put in the <style type="text/css"> tag in the head of the
	  document. This makes it easier for the style to be removed to a
	  separate style sheet (ideal) but still allows users to browse the
	  styled pages without having to worry about an external style sheet.

I think those were most of the points that were covered in the other
thread.

emma

-- 
Emma Jane Hogbin
[[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]