Re^2: let's have valid html

[particle]

thanks for the response.

In shownote, indentation is done with nested <ul>s. There is no <li> for the content, though, which is illegal. I'm not sure about the compatability of any of the easy workarounds -- could use a li type=none, haven't done any research into how compatable that is.

or you could use style sheets instead of nested uls.

wasn't aware of the htmlnest option, i'll check it out. also wasn't aware of the reliance of everything being patched. as diotalevi pointed out below, we probably won't get posts in xhtml format--that's a fair point. but i think xhmtl 1.0 transitional is still pretty forgiving--note the transitional in the moniker. i don't expect the site will validate on every page, but newest nodes (and other pages where it's possible) should be valid something, in my opinion.

[theorbtwo]

The compatibilty of the site is of the utmost importance to me. Because of this, using style sheets instead of nested ULs isn't going to cut it, because there are still a decent number of browsers that won't render it according to our intent. It's even worse then putting in the li tags -- putting in the li tags will make an extra dot appear on browsers that don't allow us to hide it, but using spans/divs with custom style will loose the indent totally.

...and Newest Nodes very nearly validates if you give the right options. The problems are:

• Everything/HTML.pm using HREF instead of href (one occourance).
• Problems caused by an out-of-date CGI.pm (13 occourances). (Not using XML empty-element syntax where approps, not quoting attributes, and writing POST instead of post.
• merlyn putting in literal character 149s into node titles, which are not escaped, and aren't valid characters in, well, anything. (Three occourances as I write this.)

Patches to solve these would be nice, but in these purticular cases, they'd require godly intervention (with the possible exception of the third one, which possibly can be solved purely though a patch of handlelinks settings.