https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=126879
--- Comment #4 from Robert Großkopf <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Andreas Heinisch from comment #3) > The definitions currently in use are the following: > > #define OOO_STRING_SVTOOLS_HTML_doctype40 "HTML PUBLIC \"-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN\" has to be replaced by "html\" > #define OOO_STRING_SVTOOLS_XHTML_doctype11 > \ > "html PUBLIC \"-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1 plus MathML 2.0//EN\" " > \ > "\"http://www.w3.org/Math/DTD/mathml2/xhtml-math11-f.dtd\""; > > Are these both obsolete now? Don't know. See https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-math/2003Jun/0041.html Seems it sometimes it better not using a doctype at all because the browser would try to fetch the whole DTD I have only seen the difference between HTML4 and HTML5. And the declaration of HTML4 and standalone tags like <br/> is a bug. The other doctypes are for xhtml-files and works well here. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
