On 30 September 2004 10:08, Simon Marlow wrote:

On 28 September 2004 16:06, Malcolm Wallace wrote:

...

On the theme of improving Haddock, do you think it could be fixed to generate valid HTML? Here are some examples of the errors I get when running Haddock output through "validate" (the Web Design Group's HTML and XML validator).

Oops! I did check the output with a validator at one point, but it looks like I've broken it since. Thanks for pointing it out.

It appears that the current CVS Haddock sources generate valid HTML, according to the W3C validator. Cheers, Simon