Developer discussion for Creative Commons technology and tools

[Nathan Yergler <nathan AT yergler.net>]

No good reason that I can imagine, probably just legacy (ie, leftover
from before there was an XHTML+RDFa doctype). Don't open a bug, just
fix it :).

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Jonathan Palecek
<jonathan AT creativecommons.org> wrote:
> Ignoring the attribute errors, the deeds should be well-formed now.
>
> The template file common to most of the deeds and the one common to
> the public domain tool use different doctypes from one another.  In
> the later case, the doctype is xhtml+rdfa.  I've opened up a new bug
> ticket for this - code.creativecommons.org/issues/issue1010
>
> If the doctype xhtml+rdfa was used, then it should be possible to have
> no validation issues what so ever.  Would there be a good reason not
> to do this?
> _______________________________________________
> cc-devel mailing list
> cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel