Twenty Twelve: markup fails HTML validation

[alexvorn2]

​http://validator.w3.org/ - the theme gives me 4 errors, most can be found in twentytwelve_entry_meta() function like:

	$date = sprintf( '<a href="%1$s" title="%2$s" rel="bookmark"><time class="entry-date" datetime="%3$s" pubdate>%4$s</time></a>',
		esc_url( get_permalink() ),
		esc_attr( get_the_time() ),
		esc_attr( get_the_date( 'c' ) ),
		esc_html( get_the_date() )
	);

Error example:
"Attribute pubdate not allowed on element time at this point."

There are other errors, the point of this ticket is to check all possible errors and make the theme validated.

[lancewillett]

We've already validated the HTML heavily during theme development and fixed broken things having to do with the theme markup.

Looking at the validator results again today all the warnings I see are for attributes that are not allowed, which appear to come from using WP core functionality -- not from markup included in the theme itself.

Suggest close as wontfix unless there are actionable items you think WP core should fix.

[alexvorn2]

Replying to lancewillett:

this is not my first ticket here!
Steps to replicate: open the source of the html code, copy, go to the site: ​http://validator.w3.org/ , paste and submit, you will get from 4 to 20 errors...

[lancewillett]

Oh, I see pubdate in the example you posted now, sorry about misreading the report.

Per ​http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/185 it's still in HTML spec, I'd like to still use it until it's officially dropped.

The key with HTML (and CSS) validation is understanding *why* something is reported as invalid and why it's OK to ignore the warning. In this case, it's safe to ignore it.

[alexvorn2]

Replying to lancewillett:

Oh, I see pubdate in the example you posted now, sorry about misreading the report.

Per ​http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/185 it's still in HTML spec, I'd like to still use it until it's officially dropped.

The key with HTML (and CSS) validation is understanding *why* something is reported as invalid and why it's OK to ignore the warning. In this case, it's safe to ignore it.

What about: "Bad value category tag for attribute rel on element a: Keyword category is not registered." ?

[SergeyBiryukov]

Replying to alexvorn2:

What about: "Bad value category tag for attribute rel on element a: Keyword category is not registered." ?

Related: #17632, #20333

[lancewillett]

Replying to alexvorn2:

What about: "Bad value category tag for attribute rel on element a: Keyword category is not registered." ?

Much discussion on those elsewhere, as noted above.

[lancewillett]

More clarity to this discussion:

Three basic validation failures:

1. rel value of category not allowed — covered in #17632, and comes from WP core code
2. rel value of generator not allowed — no longer in Microformats spec (can't find a history of it anywhere); originally came from the Sandbox theme by Scott Wallick
3. pubdate in the time element — dropped from both living specs (WHATWG and W3C WG)

After discussion in #wordpress-dev IRC and also consulting with @iandstewart on the history of 2 and 3 — seems best to remove 2 and 3 from all the default themes at this point.

​IRC log

[lancewillett]

In [22206]:

Twenty Twelve: remove invalid pubdate value from time elements. See #22095.

[lancewillett]

In [22207]:

Twenty Twelve: remove invalid rel attribute generator from footer markup, see #22095.

[lancewillett]

In [22213]:

Twenty Eleven: remove invalid pubdate value from time elements. See #22095.

[lancewillett]

In [22214]:

Twenty Ten and Eleven: remove invalid rel attribute generator from footer markup, see #22095.