Re: texi2html output validity

[Yuri Khan]

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Ivan Shmakov <address@hidden> wrote:

>  >>>> In this snippet, I count 2 instances of improper tag nesting,
>
>  >> I count just a single one, but yes, that second </p> surely
>  >> invalidates the fragment.
>
>  > <a><p></a> is improper* nesting in my book.  All paired tags SHOULD**
>  > be explicitly closed.
>
>  > * note I did not say “invalid”
>
>         Yes; but /I/ did.  And the HTML5 TR agrees with me on that [1]:

So one is <a><p></a> and the other is </p></p>.

>         As for the software that I’m not the principal developer of, –
>         I’d accept any output that does conform to the standards.

Hmm. I would accept *for my own use* any output that conforms to the
standards, but I would be hesitant to distribute that output.

>  > address@hidden and @verb]
>
>         Given that either command is probably currently used for code
>         fragments anyway, using <code /> (possibly with a class) sounds
>         like a better solution.

No objection.

>         … The question is: is it still necessary to offer HTML 3
>         compatibility in the generated documents?

Whyfor? HTML 4.0 was blessed seventeen years ago. HTML 4.01, fifteen
years ago. HTML 5, a couple months ago.