Last modified: 2011-11-19 14:10:34 UTC
Since some time during this year 2011, the skin of Cologne Blue displays incorrectly. The top part, which should be all blue, is not blue above the left menu, and this way it doesn't look so nice. It is bad everywhere, including mediawiki.org. It should look like this: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/File:Cologne_Blue_screenshot.png But everyone can see himself/herself that the header (text like MEDIAWIKI, WIKIPEDIA) is not starting from top left corner. Now, I use Firefox 6 and openSUSE 11.3.
Hmm, seems that not only the layout is broken, but also some of the HTML structure of the top header is not fully in order.
Thanks for bringing that up. It seems that even http://en.wikipedia.org does not pass the W3C Validator at http://validator.w3.org. It has a total of 3 errors. Same applies for my home wiki, et.wikipedia.org. Some time ago, it was all fine. Right now, I used both, the online validation and the upload tool (to see it with my own skin). Wikimedia.org passes as XHTML 1.0 Strict (only one I found passing the tests), but even mediawiki.org has 13 errors for HTML5. Shouldn't we open also a new bug report that Wikimedia pages don't use correct HTML/XHTML. It seems to be a very serious issue to me.
(In reply to comment #2) > Thanks for bringing that up. It seems that even http://en.wikipedia.org does > not pass the W3C Validator at http://validator.w3.org. It has a total of 3 > errors. Same applies for my home wiki, et.wikipedia.org. Some time ago, it was > all fine. > > Right now, I used both, the online validation and the upload tool (to see it > with my own skin). Wikimedia.org passes as XHTML 1.0 Strict (only one I found > passing the tests), but even mediawiki.org has 13 errors for HTML5. > > Shouldn't we open also a new bug report that Wikimedia pages don't use correct > HTML/XHTML. It seems to be a very serious issue to me. Those errors are minor, they shouldn't affect anything in a way that would make it a serious issue.
@Jaan That's nothing serious. It's because we are preparing to switch towards HTML5. The concept of 'valid' HTML and CSS has long since been an unnecessary one. Things simply need to work. Of course we only try to deviate from the standard where needed, but it's not something we hold as dear to as 5 or more years ago. Anyways, since the websites run TidyHTML, the actual errors wouldn't be visible in validator anyways. Tidy corrects them before the page is created. The thing is that the 'correction' is not the layout that we want. I'll try to take a further look.
Fixed in r103672 Checking to see if there are other regressions.
