On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 8:47 AM Patrice Dumas <pertu...@free.fr> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 08:33:53AM -0700, Raymond Toy wrote: > > It looks like texinfo 6.8 inserts: > > > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" " > > http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd";> > > > > at the beginning of each html file. > > > > In this day and age, shouldn't it be just <!DOCTYPE html>? Or does > texinfo > > html output really need that? > > This should change with the next release, <!DOCTYPE html> is now the > default. > Oh, ok. I can wait until then. Not that it really matters to me; I was just getting a warning from Chrome Lighthouse about that. As long as texinfo does the right thing here, I'm perfectly fine with it. > > > I'm not a web dev but a few times I wrote web pages, my old emacs would > > insert the loose.dtd lines, and reviewers would say I shouldn't. It > should > > be the simple one. > > What is produced by texi2any is actually HTML 4.01 Transitional, > compatible with HTML5. My personnal view is that the old DTD has > advantages over the new <!DOCTYPE html> for various reasons: > * we know which HTML version it is. <!DOCTYPE html> (and HTML5) is > an evolving standard which is anything but practical. > Yeah, as a "living" standard, it's really hard to know what is supported. I guess you end up having to test for everything. Or hope the browser is up-to-date with the current spec version of the day. Thanks for your comments. * offline validation is easier. I could not find an offline validator > easy to install on a debian testing for HTML5. > > (In fact, I disagree with the directions taken by the HTML standard with > HTML5, but that's probably off topic...). > > Going forward we must abide to the new practices, even if they make our > life as developpers worse, since some day we will use HTML5 constructs > that are not compatible with HTML 4.01 Transitional. > > -- > Pat > -- Ray
