473,686 Members | 2,233 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Massive HTML coding errors

The homepage i have had up and seemingly working is:
http://oil4lessllc.com/
However, the validator has so many complaints, and being so
incompetent, i have no clue as to how to fix it all.
Would the use of Dreamweaver be of great help?
Apr 14 '06
78 4888
Tony wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
Yes, the image is a bit close to the PDF links, and i can move it
for better spacing; that is a good idea -->thanks!
So you are saying that there is too much code for the effect seen?
That means there should be a more efficent way of creating that effect.
As far as DreamWeaver goes, i cannot afford even the free 30 day
trial, as i am on POTS and downloading anything larger than 2Megs gets
bitchy - even with a download manager.

I think you would do much better to check out some good HTML tutorials
and work on hand-coding. Use an editor with syntax highlighting and
you'll find it a lot easier to see what's going on. (Personally, I like
Crimson Editor - http://www.crimsoneditor.com)

Front Page will render a disaster of HTML. Dreamweaver does better, but
it still isn't all that clean, from what I understand. Most of the tools
like that I've ever seen make a mess of the HTML.
Downloading it is simply not possible for me.
I have the various M$ products that supposedly are HTML tools, but
they are piggy as hell and the created code is very piggy and obscure,
so i un-installed the crap.

Good :)

I agree on FrontPage; even i, with my zero knowledge of HTML could
tell that it is absolute garbage.
Apr 15 '06 #11
axlq wrote:
In article <5R************ *****@newsread3 .news.pas.earth link.net>,
Robert Baer <ro********@ear thlink.net> wrote:
The homepage i have had up and seemingly working is:
http://oil4lessllc.com/
However, the validator has so many complaints, and being so
incompetent , i have no clue as to how to fix it all.
Would the use of Dreamweaver be of great help?

No. This is such a simple page to hand-code. Try that, with
header, paragraph, and list tags, and then style the tags. That's
all you need. The page source at your site is an absolute mess. It
also misuses the "id" attribute; IDs are supposed to be unique.

For example, the following code will serve as markup for your site,
it validates HTML 4.01 Strict, and it's a lot simpler than what
you have. All you need to do is add some style classes to various
elements, which I have started for you:

----------------------------------------------------------------

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>Oil 4 Less LLC</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
h1 { text-align: center; font-weight: normal; }
h2 { font-weight: normal; }
.biggertext { font-size: large; }
.contact { text-align: center; }
-->
</style>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Oil 4 Less LLC</h1>

<p><span class="biggerte xt">Efficentl y lift oil, sand and
water with our pump...</span><br>
... at less than one-fifth the cost of a traditional pump.</p>

<p>Our pump may make shallow low pressure gas wells profitable by
removing the water, thus preventing drowning.</p>

<h2>PRODUCTS: </h2>

<ul>
<li><a href="http://oil4lessllc.com/ExecSumm.pdf">E nhanced Lifter
(E.L.) Pump</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.logwell.com/products/Codatron_Corotr on.html">Codatr on
(TM) shunt HV regulator</a></li>
<li><a href="http://oil4lessllc.com/CodatronHT.pdf" >Codatron HT (TM)
shunt HV regulator</a></li>
<li><a href="http://oil4lessllc.com/CCL4HT.pdf">Hig h gain CCL
amplifier</a></li>
</ul>

<h2>Patent references:</h2>

<ul>
<li><a href="http://oil4lessllc.com/6222350.PDF">Mo sley</a> (Titan's
HV regulator)</li>
<li><a href="http://oil4lessllc.com/HVREGPAT2.pdf"> Improved
clones</a> (public domain)</li>
<li><a href="http://oil4lessllc.com/HVREGPAT1.PDF"> Codatron
design</a> (public domain)</li>
</ul>

<p><a href="http://oil4lessllc.com/Temps.pdf">Temp erature chart</a></p>

<p class="bigcente rtext">It gets *hot* down there!</p>

<p> class="bigcente rtext">Use our Codatron HT (TM) shunt regulator
to replace the Corotron(TM)</p>

<hr>

<p class="contact" >Contact us: <a
href="http://oil4lessllc.com/ad*****@example .com">ad*****@e xample.com</a></p>

</body>
</html>

Thanks; will give it a try.
Apr 15 '06 #12
Albert Wiersch wrote:
Try this as most people find it easier to use and understand:
http://onlinewebcheck.com/?url=oil4lessllc.com/

It seems like a few small "fixings" would do a great deal to improve the
validation issues.

You used a different validator, and got more informative results.
Thanks!
Apr 15 '06 #13
fr*******@south ernskies.co.uk wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
The homepage i have had up and seemingly working is:
http://oil4lessllc.com/


Incidentally, you also have a spelling mistake: "Efficently ".

Yup; saw that.
Apr 15 '06 #14
fr*******@south ernskies.co.uk wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
The homepage i have had up and seemingly working is:
http://oil4lessllc.com/
However, the validator has so many complaints, and being so
incompetent , i have no clue as to how to fix it all.
It does need quite a bit of work!

The layout that you have is extremely simple, and the code should
reflect that; at present, it doesn't. It also has quite a bit going on
that a validator wouldn't comment on, but that needs looking at.

Would the use of Dreamweaver be of great help?


Forking out for Dreamweaver would be a complete waste of money for such
a small site; you'll find your time/money much better spent using
something as simple as Notepad.

Anyway, here's some tips that should help:

1. The DTD at the top of your HTML code is invalid! It's supposed to
tell browsers (and validators) what "flavour" of HTML you're using;
because it's invalid, they have to guess and make kludges. Get rid of
the one you've got, and replace it with:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
You will find initially that this increases the number of errors that a
validator finds, but that's a good thing; if you don't know there's a
problem, you can't fix it!

2. When I access your site using Firefox it tells me that I need to
have Quicktime installed. I can't imagine what the Quicktime file adds
to your site, but you need to seriously consider a different approach.
Relatively few PCs have Quicktime installed, and it's a fairly safe bet
that most of the ones that don't are used by people who won't know how
to install it, or won't be interested in doing so. Don't create
barriers for your customers!

** My guess is that the sound file is triggering that request for
QuickTime; it is a simple Midi file and any player will do - including
the one that comes with most GUI OSes.
I had a hell of a time finding any code that allowed the running of a
sound file, and i found only two ways mentioned; what you see inthe code
is the only way that worked.

3. Your HTML is littered with absolute positioning, and width and
height dimensions measured in pixels, all of which should be got rid
of. You have no real control over what browser your customer uses,
what size screen they have, what size they have their browser window
at, or what size font they prefer to read things at; all of these will
conspire to make your site look ugly or even unusable (with one block
of text overlaying another). About the only dimensions you need are
those for your images, and a width of, say, 50% for the div that starts
on screen with "PRODUCTS:" . ** So if one does not define width and height, then the picture's
"native" pixel size rules?

4. As someone else has commented on, you have three div tags without a
closing ">".

5. As has also been commented on by someone else, you've declared the
same id attribute in more than one place. If you need to have two
different HTML elements with the same CSS, then you need to use a
class, not an id. In crude terms the only practical difference between
the two is that when you define the style in the CSS, you precede the
class name with a period rather than a pound sign.

6. You've also got way too many divs and ids, and also a number of
wholly redundant span tags; these are one reason why the code looks so
complicated to you, and also means that there's more places for you to
make mistakes. You really need very few divs for such a simple design;
here's what I'd do:
a. Everything from "Oil 4 Less LLC" to "drowning." would be one div.
b. "PRODUCTS" to "Temperatur e chart" would be the next div.
c. The next div would contain the volcano picture, the ROHS logo, and
the text from "It gets" to "Corotron(T M)".
d. The fourth and final div would contain the "O4Lstamp.g if" image and
the e-mail link.
As simple as that! You'll need "float: left" as part of the style for
the middle two divs so that they don't stack up one on top of the
other. You'll find that almost all of the necessary styling can then
be done by simply defining styles for generic HTML tags; starting with
wrapping the company name with an <h1> tag at the very top. And keep
all of the CSS definitions within the <style> element in the document
head; at the moment, you've got some up there and a great deal more
buried within the HTML itself. It'll make life a lot easier for you if
you only have to make changes in one place!

7. The two lists of links should really be coded as unordered lists.

8. You need to be more careful when defining "font-family". Google
for "web-safe fonts" and you'll realise that there are only a very few
fonts that you can be certain that all or most of your customers will
have. You also need to provide a list of "fallback" fonts, so that
your definition would look something like this:
font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif;

9. Your e-mail link is invalid. You need to change the HTML from
this:
href="sa***@oil 4lessllc.com"
to this:
href="mailto:sa ***@oil4lessllc .com" When i visied each sample you gave, the ersults wer the same
"mailto:sa***@o il4lessllc.com" , so i do not see why it is invalid.

In addition to all of the above regarding your coding, as a matter of
good netiquette you should explicitly state that most of your links are
to PDF documents, and ideally should provide a link to the relevant
page on Adobe's website so that Acrobat Reader can be installed if
necessary. Similarly, one link is to an external website, and should
be identified as such. ** Thanks; did not know that.

I ended up writing rather more than I'd intended! Hope it's of use...

Apr 15 '06 #15
Albert Wiersch wrote:
Try this as most people find it easier to use and understand:
http://onlinewebcheck.com/?url=oil4lessllc.com/

It seems like a few small "fixings" would do a great deal to improve the
validation issues.

Thanks; now i have access to three validators!
Apr 15 '06 #16
since you are using css to layout your pages it makes no sense to have
all the following junk in the body tag. all that can be done in the
style sheet

<body bgcolor="#fffff f" link="#0000ff" vlink="#660099" text="#000000"
topmargin="0" leftmargin="0">

instead of hanging in forums asking what to do why not visit the
html/xhtml/css reference pages? half the people that give you advice in
forums never visited the reference pages either. be smart

best html reference http://www.w3schools.com/html/html_reference.asp
best style sheet reference
http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_reference.asp html links
http://www.websitetips.com/html/ style sheet links
http://www.websitetips.com/css/ html dom
http://www.w3schools.com/htmldom/dom_reference.asp

Apr 15 '06 #17
Robert Baer wrote:
That code was generated about a year ago, mostly by using Netscape
4.7 composer - if i remember correctly.


Ack! That thing's like ten years old!!
--
AGw.

Apr 15 '06 #18
Robert Baer wrote:
fr*******@south ernskies.co.uk wrote:
2. When I access your site using Firefox it tells me that I need to
have Quicktime installed. I can't imagine what the Quicktime file adds
to your site, but you need to seriously consider a different approach.
Relatively few PCs have Quicktime installed, and it's a fairly safe bet
that most of the ones that don't are used by people who won't know how
to install it, or won't be interested in doing so. Don't create
barriers for your customers!

** My guess is that the sound file is triggering that request for
QuickTime; it is a simple Midi file and any player will do - including
the one that comes with most GUI OSes.
I had a hell of a time finding any code that allowed the running of a
sound file, and i found only two ways mentioned; what you see inthe code
is the only way that worked.


Except that it didn't! This is exactly the sort of thing that will
seem to work fine when testing it on one's own machine, but can
completely fail to work on someone else's!

Not to mention that you're assuming that your visitors are surfing with
the sound on... and what if they're surfing from work and don't want
the whole office to suddenly hear the sound of burners roaring away?!
3. Your HTML is littered with absolute positioning, and width and
height dimensions measured in pixels, all of which should be got rid
of. You have no real control over what browser your customer uses,
what size screen they have, what size they have their browser window
at, or what size font they prefer to read things at; all of these will
conspire to make your site look ugly or even unusable (with one block
of text overlaying another). About the only dimensions you need are
those for your images, and a width of, say, 50% for the div that starts
on screen with "PRODUCTS:" .

** So if one does not define width and height, then the picture's
"native" pixel size rules?


Indeed. But you shouldn't use CSS to try to over-ride an image's true
size, if that's what you're hinting at. If the image file is, say,
118x83, then that's what your code should reflect. If that means that
the image is the wrong size on your page, then you need to edit the
image file.
9. Your e-mail link is invalid. You need to change the HTML from
this:
href="sa***@oil 4lessllc.com"
to this:
href="mailto:sa ***@oil4lessllc .com"

When i visied each sample you gave, the ersults wer the same
"mailto:sa***@o il4lessllc.com" , so i do not see why it is invalid.


Okay, I was a bit sloppy with that one!

As coded, this:
href="sa***@oil 4lessllc.com"
is telling your browser that the link goes to a page with named
"sa***@oil4less llc.com", which is presumably not what you intend. I'd
imagine that what you actually intended was for someone clicking on the
link to fire up their e-mail client, ready to send you an e-mail; in
which case, the code should have been this:
href="mailto:sa ***@oil4lessllc .com"

What I didn't mention, though, was that although this is technically
correct, it's problematical because it assumes that your visitor has an
e-mail client configured to respond to it. A much better solution, and
one that will shield your e-mail address from spam harvesters, is to
use a feedback form. If you have a Google around you'll find example
code that you can use, as well as some explanation of the additional
technical requirements that you'll need to deal with behind the scenes;
a bit more work, but it's all part of the learning process!

HTH...
--
AGw.

Apr 15 '06 #19
To further the education of mankind, fr*******@south ernskies.co.uk
declaimed:
Robert Baer wrote:
That code was generated about a year ago, mostly by using Netscape
4.7 composer - if i remember correctly.


Ack! That thing's like ten years old!!


So is css. :)

--
Neredbojias
Infinity can have limits.
Apr 15 '06 #20

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.