Closed
Bug 258439
Opened 20 years ago
Closed 20 years ago
make /bugs/ validate
Categories
(www.mozilla.org :: General, defect)
www.mozilla.org
General
Tracking
(Not tracked)
VERIFIED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: annevk, Assigned: annevk)
References
()
Details
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
21.66 KB,
patch
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review | |
10.46 KB,
text/html
|
Details |
The patch removes all the presentational markup and replaces it with more semantic markup. The orange note at the top is replaced with two p.note; fantasai, you think that is ok? (This is a request for review ;-), it doesn't seem to be possible to bind that to the attachment in this component.)
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•20 years ago
|
||
Updated•20 years ago
|
QA Contact: daniel.bugmail → nb
No, those two need to be <p class="important"> I'm assuming you didn't cut anything or move stuff around. *is mainly looking over the new code rather than the changes* All URIs should be relative to the file itself, not to the root. + <p>Bugs and <abbr>RFEs</abbr> The 's' should be outside the <abbr>. + example, problems with table layout should be assigned to + <abbr>HTML</abbr> Tables, not to Layout. These component names need to be updated. + development process. If a bug is marked <tt>mozilla1.3</tt>, it Some keywords are in <tt>, some are just in quotes. They should all be marked with <code>. Likewise for bug statuses. + <code>cvs diff -u > mypatch.diff</code>. To apply a patch, go to + the proper directory and <code>patch < bugpatch.diff</code>. Use <kbd> for these instead. \ No newline at end of file Please add a newline to the end of the file.
QA Contact: nb → daniel.bugmail
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•20 years ago
|
||
- I did cut one thing. RESOLVED LATER and RESOLVED REMIND. You can't use them within Bugzilla anymore so it didn't make sense to let them stay. - I changed /projects/bugzilla to bugzilla.org, but that is a logical move. - I wonder why URIs should be relative to the file, but I changed it (local versions perhaps?). - All changed to the CODE element. Do we want some CLASS to make them (more) "semantic"? - What is the deal with that new line? :-)
Assignee | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #158203 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•20 years ago
|
||
Nicolas, could you check this in? Most things became clear for me in the last 24 hours. Besides, it is a big improvement over the current file.
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Updated•20 years ago
|
QA Contact: daniel.bugmail → nbebout
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•20 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•20 years ago
|
||
Thanks Nicolas, marking FIXED.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 20 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Updated•20 years ago
|
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Updated•16 years ago
|
Product: mozilla.org → Websites
Updated•12 years ago
|
Component: www.mozilla.org → General
Product: Websites → www.mozilla.org
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•