On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 03:52:37PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > strict HTML doesn't have <u> or <font>, not width in table... > > I attach the result of the use of http://validator.w3.org/ > with a strict dtd, and the original file produced by texi2html. > With Transitional, it is valid.
Ah, that makes sense. In the long run, moving to strict is probably good though. > > I have been working on a default stylesheet for my GNU manual that balances > > æsthetics with readability and I would love to contribute this to texi2html > > and > > work with you on getting it broadly useful for distribution. > > I am not that much interested in the stylesheets themselves, but > rather in having appropriate class attributes in the output to let > anybody do its own stylesheet. Of course, very important. > That being said shipping .css files to show examples of use would be nice, > even more if the output is nice ;-) Great, I would love to help design the default CSS for texi2html. > > Not sure what this means. How can I help out? > > Myabe this is not the answer you are looking for but, as you already > know, the idea is to replace C makeinfo with texi2html. For that texi2html > has to converge to makeinfo to be strictly compatible. This, in turn, > implies: Ah, yes... this all sounds good -- but is too much for me to really get involved with while I am making the push for my own GNU Project. However, I would love to be involved in the latter stages of finalising the CSS class name hooks and default stylesheets. Where would the DocBook work sit on that timeline? -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater
