doc-head-open.inc in 3.08 started by adding: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> 3.18 just adds <!DOCTYPE html> -- which gives rise to "errors" in most verification processes (W3C etc). Was there a reason to change this? (Can't find anything in bugs.) I'm playing with the Google mod_pagespeed in Apache 2.4, and adding the full DOCTYPE seems necessary. I haven't (yet) seen a downside to adding it back in. Best -- Paul
The shortened doctype looks odd, but is the new official recommendation for HTML 5. Koha has changed to this for the OPAC and (I believe the staff side). 2015-02-19 17:59 GMT-07:00 Paul A <paul.a@navalmarinearchive.com>:
doc-head-open.inc in 3.08 started by adding:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
3.18 just adds <!DOCTYPE html> -- which gives rise to "errors" in most verification processes (W3C etc). Was there a reason to change this? (Can't find anything in bugs.)
I'm playing with the Google mod_pagespeed in Apache 2.4, and adding the full DOCTYPE seems necessary. I haven't (yet) seen a downside to adding it back in.
Best -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
-- Jesse Weaver
On 19 February 2015 at 19:59, Paul A <paul.a@navalmarinearchive.com> wrote:
3.18 just adds <!DOCTYPE html> -- which gives rise to "errors" in most verification processes (W3C etc). Was there a reason to change this? (Can't find anything in bugs.)
<!doctype html> is the declaration for HTML5. If a verification tool breaks on the doctype declaration (versus reporting on things on the page that’s not HTML5-compliant), then the verification tool is broken.
I'm playing with the Google mod_pagespeed in Apache 2.4, and adding the full DOCTYPE seems necessary. I haven't (yet) seen a downside to adding it back in.
Using the shorter doctype means we’re switching to HTML5; adding the rest back in means we’re going back to HTML 4. I’m not current with where Koha is going but I assume Koha would be going HTML5 as most sites are going to go HTML5. -- cheers, ambrose // http://o.gniw.ca / http://gniw.ca //
participants (3)
-
Ambrose LI -
Jesse -
Paul A