RFC: doc/www cleanup

[Eitan Adler]

On 3 August 2012 07:02, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> 4, Stricter XHML: I don't propose going directly to XHTML Strict 1.0 but
>>
>> Eh, why would you go to XHTML at all considering it's basically
>> deprecated in favor for HTML5 (yes, there is no standard for that, but
>> still..).

There is a standard. The WHATWG maintains it here:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/

> I can think of two reasons:
> (1) It is the trivial and straight way to go to XHTML for now. HTML5 would
> be a bigger jump that should be tested more carefully. The current plan is
> to do the migration in several phases for better QA. For example, for now we
> are only going to DocBook 4.2/XML, which can still be used with Jade and
> DocBook DSSSL. Going to full XML-based standards and newer DocBook version
> will be a next step that requires more testing.

It is harder to move to XHTML than it is to move to HTML5.

> (2) Are you sure HTML5 is supported in all browsers that our users use? For
> example, I sometimes use links and I imagine other people may do so, as
> well. We should investigate this more.

I am reasonably sure browsers support HTML5 due to the fact that HTML5
largely documents *how things already work*.


-- 
Eitan Adler