strange... tidy is also supposed to be based on code by the W3C maybe it's you using transitional and me using strict?
In principle, you are right - we ought to have different renderkits for different html versions, but to implement this, we won't have the time ;) it might be easier to have an attribute org.apache.myfaces.HTML_VERSION which changes the rendering where tweaks are necessary. regards, Martin On 6 Jun 2005 16:43:24 -0000, mfaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Perhaps the problem is with the validator then. I was using the HTML > Validator at http://validator.w3.org/ > > Thanks, > -Mark > > On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 18:32:13 +0200, Martin Marinschek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > > > Strange.. > > > > if I use that: > > > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" > > "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd";> > > <HTML> > > <HEAD> > > <TITLE>Chapter 2</TITLE> > > <LINK rel="Index" href="../index.html"/> > > <LINK rel="Next" href="Chapter3.html"/> > > <LINK rel="Prev" href="Chapter1.html"/> > > </HEAD> > > <body> > > </body> > > </html> > > > > it validates without a prob in Tidy? > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > On 6 Jun 2005 15:07:07 -0000, mfaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I came across a validation error when validating a page and the cause was > > > that the page is HTML 4.0.1 Transitional and the <link> tag was ended in > > > XML > > > style, like <link .... /> > > > > > > I was able to fix this by removing the "/" from line 423 of > > > org.apache.myfaces.component.html.util.AddResource. I did not submit a > > > diff > > > because I don't think this is the correct way to fix it. I'm not sure of > > > how each renderkit works? For example is there a renderkit for each type > > > of > > > HTML and XHTML? To me it seems there would have to be a separate render > > > kit > > > for every type of HTML/XHTML that could be validated? That is how it > > > should > > > properly be fixed. Anyway I thought I would at least submit it as an FYI. > > > > > > If I knew more about the structure/organization of the code, as I'm sure I > > > will in time, I would have attempted to fix it on my own. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
