I guess there've been a misunderstanding due to my wording - I was asking about the generated HTML documents - they do not validate with the w3c validator and having the autodoc system generate valid HTML shouldn't be that much of a problem.
/ Marek Habersack (Grendel)
Previous text:
2002-10-18 20:31: Subject: Autodocs in the latest 7.3
It is not possible to validate the XML used by the autodoc system, due to limitations in DTDs and DTD-compositioning. The XML-files generated from source code comments uses an XML format that is not possible to write a DTD for. The "editorial" parts of the manual are written in a subset of this XML language that is possible to make a DTD for. The description file that describes how to put things to gether into a manual is written in a completely different XML langauge for which a fully descriptive DTD can not be made. A good try is however available in refdoc/structure/structure.dtd with comments about the additional constraints. Finally everything is mashed together into one big XML-file for every manual, which is a composit of all the mentioned XML languages without using XML namespaces.
The question is not why we are stupid enough to defy w3c's shining specs. The question is why w3c makes unusable specs.
/ Martin Nilsson (Fake Build Master)