From af0679aa77a18b176ef52d6c770696c9492f674d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "jon+ikiwiki@663db4cb26e845748f3e7e6d51eeb26c6014f1c3" Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 11:16:39 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] respond re pubdate attribute --- ...ate_wrong_when_using_xhtml5___34__mode__34__.mdwn | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/bugs/html5_time_element__39__s_pubdate_wrong_when_using_xhtml5___34__mode__34__.mdwn b/doc/bugs/html5_time_element__39__s_pubdate_wrong_when_using_xhtml5___34__mode__34__.mdwn index 228847b4a..1bda7e5f4 100644 --- a/doc/bugs/html5_time_element__39__s_pubdate_wrong_when_using_xhtml5___34__mode__34__.mdwn +++ b/doc/bugs/html5_time_element__39__s_pubdate_wrong_when_using_xhtml5___34__mode__34__.mdwn @@ -13,8 +13,16 @@ The pubdate REQUIRES a date, so e.g. `pubdate="2009-03-24T18:02:14Z"` >>> >>> Posted <time datetime="2007-12-06T05:00:00Z" pubdate="pubdate">Thu 06 Dec 2007 12:00:00 AM EST</time> >>> ->>> which shows up as an error on https://validator.w3.org/ --Luke Schierer - +>>> which shows up as an error on https://validator.w3.org/ --Luke Schierer + +>>>> My reading of Joey's response, above, was that (according to the spec at the time), `pubdate="pubdate"` is what +>>>> should be generated, *not* `pubdate="timestamp"`, and so what you are seeing is expected. However, looking at +>>>> the *current* Spec (linked elsewhere in this page), `pubdate` is not actually a valid attribute any more at +>>>> all. And indeed, running my own blog through the Validator, I see: +>>>>> `Error: Attribute pubdate not allowed on element time at this point.` +>>>> *— [[Jon]], 2020-10-05* + + Otherwise the XML parser chokes.