help.ubuntu.com claims to be HTML 5 but is not (but extremely close)

Bug #478097 reported by Prateek Karandikar
8
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Ubuntu Website - OBSOLETE
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned
ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu)
Won't Fix
Low
Unassigned

Bug Description

Binary package hint: ubuntu-docs

https://help.ubuntu.com/ claims to be XHTML 1.0 Transitional, but is not: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=https%3A%2F%2Fhelp.ubuntu.com

Revision history for this message
Shane Fagan (shanepatrickfagan) wrote :

Marking as invalid for ubuntu docs. I marked it as a bug against the ubuntu website.

Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: New → Invalid
Changed in ubuntu-website:
status: New → Invalid
Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: Invalid → New
Revision history for this message
Shane Fagan (shanepatrickfagan) wrote :

Crap my bad help.ubuntu.com is under the ubuntu-docs umbrella.

Revision history for this message
Shane Fagan (shanepatrickfagan) wrote :

Where does it say that its xhtml transitional and why does it matter?

Revision history for this message
Shane Fagan (shanepatrickfagan) wrote :

Ok I checked and I know what you are complaining about. Its invalid xhtml transitional. This isnt a problem have a look at http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com
The w3 validator looks at web markup very strictly so this isnt a bug that needs fixing.

Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: New → Invalid
Revision history for this message
Prateek Karandikar (prateek.karandikar) wrote :

Huh, how is youtube.com relevant to this? That's like saying "if Windows can have broken feature X, then so can we".

There are two issues here:

1. The page contradicts itself, by claiming to be XHTML 1.0 Transitional and not being XHTML 1.0 Transitional. An easy way to fix this is of course is to just get rid of the DOCTYPE. That still won't solve the bigger issue:

2. The page is not [X]HTML standard compliant. Ubuntu should set an example by following web standards, and not adopt the fix in "1" above.

And if you really want other examples, how about http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.debian.org , http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://fedoraproject.org/ , http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.opensuse.org , http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.redhat.com , http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.linux.org , http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.gimp.org , http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.inkscape.org ?

Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: Invalid → New
Revision history for this message
Matthew East (mdke) wrote :

Thanks for the bug. Given that help.ubuntu.com is generated from docbook xml using fairly standard stylesheets, most of these errors are likely to be caused by those stylesheets. We may have a look into this to see if we can improve things but it's not going to be high priority.

Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
status: New → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Connor Imes (ckimes) wrote :

After looking more into this, it seems that we may be handling some of our custom XSLs incorrectly, particularly w.r.t default namespaces. I'll see if I can clean these up.

Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
assignee: nobody → Connor Imes (rocket2dmn)
status: Confirmed → In Progress
Revision history for this message
Connor Imes (ckimes) wrote :

I've done some work in the Oneiric branch which now uses Mallard as our source and builds into HTML5. There are a few warnings left caused by the yelp-xsl tool used during the build, but I won't try to work around those as the pages validate without errors as they are.

I'll also work on the static html pages at the top level of help.ubuntu.com, but I'm not sure we'll make any changes to the existing generated documents for each release.

Revision history for this message
Connor Imes (ckimes) wrote :

I pushed a fix for most of this into the Natty branch, but there is one error remaining. If anybody knows how to fix this, I'd be delighted to get a solution:

     Line 39, Column 88: document type does not allow element "form" here

     …ite('<form action="https://help.ubuntu.com/search.html" id="cse-search-box">');

Also, it looks like w3 may have updated their validator for HMTL5 as new errors are appearing from our Oneiric branch, I'll look into those as well.

Connor Imes (ckimes)
Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
assignee: Connor Imes (rocket2dmn) → nobody
John Kim (kotux)
Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: In Progress → New
Rafael (valromer)
Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: New → Invalid
Revision history for this message
Gunnar Hjalmarsson (gunnarhj) wrote :

It's unclear to me how the ubuntu-docs task can be invalid, so re-opening it. Please don't invalidate a bug without explanation.

Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
importance: Wishlist → Low
status: Invalid → New
Revision history for this message
Doug Smythies (dsmythies) wrote :

If we want to keep this one open, then the title should be changed from:

help.ubuntu.com claims to be XHTML 1.0 Transitional but is not

to:

help.ubuntu.com claims to be HTML 5 but is not (but extremely close)

I'll fix the help.ubuntu.com glue files in a few days, during the 13.04 EOL deletion update. The one error in the index.html files is trivial.

The errors in the compiled Desktop docs and Serverguide are very minimal, and myself I wouldn't worry about it.

Revision history for this message
Gunnar Hjalmarsson (gunnarhj) wrote :

Right, Doug, I agree on all you said. My objection was of the formal kind, i.e. the bug is not and has never been invalid.

Updated the title.

summary: - help.ubuntu.com claims to be XHTML 1.0 Transitional but is not
+ help.ubuntu.com claims to be HTML 5 but is not (but extremely close)
Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
daniel (danielcandido82)
Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: Confirmed → In Progress
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
information type: Public → Private
Revision history for this message
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) wrote :

(I see no reason for this to be private, and the person responsible no longer has an LP account.)

information type: Private → Public
Revision history for this message
Gunnar Hjalmarsson (gunnarhj) wrote :

Let's simply close this bug. (I for one can't see that the pages claim to comply with any specific standard nowadays, btw.)

Changed in ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu):
status: Fix Committed → Won't Fix
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.