Re: [Boost-docs] [Invalid] Markup Validation of index.html - W3C Markup Validator_files

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] [Invalid] Markup Validation of index.html - W3C Markup Validator_files
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-19 11:44:24

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost-docs [mailto:boost-docs-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Daniel James
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 9:48 AM
> To: Discussion of Boost Documentation
> Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] [Invalid] Markup Validation of index.html - W3C Markup Validator_files
> 
> On 19 December 2013 09:17, Paul A. Bristow <pbristow_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > OK - thanks - I'll file it under
> >
> > "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds," ;-)
> 
> Maybe not. On second thoughts, there is now a stronger reason to add a doctype. The doctype is one
of
> the factors which Internet Explorer uses to decide which browser engine to use. If has two - the
old non-
> standards compliant one, and the shiny new engine. It keeps the old one around to avoid breaking
web
> pages that depend on its quirks, which includes our documentation pages. New features are only
added
> to the new engine, so we'll have to update our pages if we want to use SVG.

:-)

Tell me if there is anything you think I can do to help, otherwise put in the :Things to do when the
dust from GITerization has settled" drawer?

Paul

PS SVG images generated by Inkscape for the proposed new logos, and the many Boost.Math plots
generated using the SVG_plot package all validate OK at the W3C site.
 
---
Paul A. Bristow,
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB  UK
[phone]  07714330204
pbristow_at_[hidden]