I've experienced this when I've exported LO's LICENSE document to HTML (from read-only mode). The encoding was: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> It's very old technology and export to something like this isn't a right way. I think we should switch to HTML5 and add ability to select XHTML optionally. The current problem is that there's no clear way to save/export document to HTML. We have: * save dialog - olde HTML4 Transitional as one and only option to save docs in HTML * export dialog - XHTML 1.1 plus MathML 2.0 in exporting What is the difference between them? LO can edit HTML5 docs with no problems. My proposal: * make HTML5 save format instead of HTML4 Transitional * stop offer to save in HTML4 Transitional * remove HTML entry from export dialog, HTML could be edited in LO Writer, unlike PDF * make two entries (split current option) in save dialog: HTML5 (.html) and XHTML (.html)
(In reply to Rezonansowy from comment #0) > I've experienced this when I've exported LO's LICENSE document to HTML (from > read-only mode). The encoding was: > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> > > It's very old technology and export to something like this isn't a right > way. I think we should switch to HTML5 and add ability to select XHTML > optionally. (Marking as Enhancement) > > The current problem is that there's no clear way to save/export document to > HTML. > We have: > * save dialog - olde HTML4 Transitional as one and only option to save docs > in HTML > * export dialog - XHTML 1.1 plus MathML 2.0 in exporting > > What is the difference between them? Well they're different export mechanisms. I think the HTML4 ("html") export is a bit older addition to the codebase. > LO can edit HTML5 docs with no problems. > > My proposal: > * make HTML5 save format instead of HTML4 Transitional > * stop offer to save in HTML4 Transitional > * remove HTML entry from export dialog, HTML could be edited in LO Writer, > unlike PDF > * make two entries (split current option) in save dialog: HTML5 (.html) and > XHTML (.html) This seems mostly reasonable. IIRC, stuff in the Save(-As) dialog are mostly editable formats, and stuff in the Export dialog are more read-only formats; I'm not sure the precise thinking about HTML in the Save dialog :-) The one question I have is: Would we lose support with older browsers if we moved export to a newer version of HTML? Status -> NEW
(In reply to Robinson Tryon (qubit) from comment #1) > The one question I have is: Would we lose support with older browsers if we > moved export to a newer version of HTML? Rather no, most HTML common tags are same, and the specific others, like <section> or <article> are purely semantic and safely ignored in older browser. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5#Error_handling
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 11:00 PM, <bugzilla-daemon@bugs.documentfoundation.org> wrote: Rezonansowy changed bug 85231 What Removed Added Severity enhancement normal If you don't consider this an enhancement, then you need to justify why it's a defect Status -> NEEDINFO It would also be helpful to have the version set, just in case someone makes changes to HTML export in the future.
(In reply to Robinson Tryon (qubit) from comment #3) > On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 11:00 PM, > <bugzilla-daemon@bugs.documentfoundation.org> wrote: > Rezonansowy changed bug 85231 > What Removed Added > Severity enhancement normal > > If you don't consider this an enhancement, then you need to justify why it's > a defect > > Status -> NEEDINFO > > It would also be helpful to have the version set, just in case someone makes > changes to HTML export in the future. See above: > The current problem is that there's no clear way to save/export document to > > HTML. > We have: > * save dialog - olde HTML4 Transitional as one and only option to save docs in HTML > * export dialog - XHTML 1.1 plus MathML 2.0 in exporting
I think we have enough information.
This bug applies to other LO components as well.
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present on a currently supported version of LibreOffice (5.0.5 or 5.1.2 https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the version of LibreOffice and your operating system, and any changes you see in the bug behavior If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a short comment that includes your version of LibreOffice and Operating System Please DO NOT - Update the version field - Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) - Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to "inherited from OOo"; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add "regression" to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa Thank you for your help! -- The LibreOffice QA Team This NEW Message was generated on: 2016-04-16
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present on a currently supported version of LibreOffice (5.2.7 or 5.3.3 https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the version of LibreOffice and your operating system, and any changes you see in the bug behavior If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a short comment that includes your version of LibreOffice and Operating System Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to "inherited from OOo"; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add "regression" to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug-20170522
Dear Rezonansowy, To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from https://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
I confirm this bug with LibreOffice 7.1.4.2 on OpenSUSE. Version: 7.1.4.2 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 10(Build:2) CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.5; UI render: default; VCL: kf5 Locale: en-GB (en_GB.utf8); UI: en-GB Calc: threaded When this bug was submitted in October 2014, HTML5 was still relatively new, since it first become a W3C recommendation in that same month: https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/4167 HTML 5 has now been around long enough to be considered as a replacement for HTML 4.01, which has been marked as a "superseded recommendation" by the W3C since March 201!: https://www.w3.org/TR/html401/ LibreOffice's XHTML export function generates code with the identifier "XHTML 1.1 plus MathML 2.0". XHTML 1.1 has also been marked as a "superseded recommendation" since March 2018: https://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/ . HTML5 has brought a large number of elements, attributes and improvements, such as adding the figure and figcaption elements (relevant to other LibO bugs), allowing the embedding of both MathML and SVG (which was probably the main use case for XHTML support) and adding support for WAI-ARIA for better accessibility (see https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/dom.html#wai-aria ; accessibility is an area in which LibO also has a number of bugs). I think this makes a strong use case for replacing both XHTML 1.1 and HTML 4 with HTML 5. (One might add an option to export HTML 5 with XML syntax.)
Dear lukasseon, To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from https://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://web.libera.chat/?settings=#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug