As you might have noticed I'm trying to clean up my web site's
HTML code. The way I do it is simply more or less redoing to
complete site, testing it on a web server I have set up on my
local network.
I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org. And I can't upload files to W3.org either,
due to all the ASP code I use.
So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server).
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction www.fantafiction.com 195  8287 
"Torbjørn Pettersen" <tpe AT broadpark DOT no> wrote: I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org.
CSE is not a validator, despite it's name, it's a linter.
So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server). http://arealvalidator.com/
--
Spartanicus
"Torbjørn Pettersen" <tpe AT broadpark DOT no> wrote: I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org.
CSE is not a validator, despite it's name, it's a linter.
So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server). http://arealvalidator.com/
--
Spartanicus
Spartanicus wrote... I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org.
CSE is not a validator, despite it's name, it's a linter.
A linter? What's that? So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server).
http://arealvalidator.com/
Thanks. Testing it now, looks good so far. Except that I'm getting
more work. ;-)
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction www.fantafiction.com
Spartanicus wrote... I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org.
CSE is not a validator, despite it's name, it's a linter.
A linter? What's that? So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server).
http://arealvalidator.com/
Thanks. Testing it now, looks good so far. Except that I'm getting
more work. ;-)
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction www.fantafiction.com
Brian wrote... where can I find a validator that validates like the one on W3.org?
At w3.org?
http://validator.w3.org/source/
I already looked at that page, and half way down it my head started
spinning. This Friday I think I'll skip the beer, and just read this a
couple of times. ;-)
If it doesn't have a "download the ready to install here" button, I'm stuck. :-/
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction www.fantafiction.com
Brian wrote... where can I find a validator that validates like the one on W3.org?
At w3.org?
http://validator.w3.org/source/
I already looked at that page, and half way down it my head started
spinning. This Friday I think I'll skip the beer, and just read this a
couple of times. ;-)
If it doesn't have a "download the ready to install here" button, I'm stuck. :-/
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction www.fantafiction.com
> I already looked at that page, and half way down it my head started spinning.
I know what you mean. The first time I installed w3c locally on my
server, I was pulling out hair. I didn't wanna go through the hassle
of installing on other intranet servers, so I just wrote my own PHP
based validator. Plus, in addition to XHTML/HTML I also wanted to
validate DocBook XML, so writing my own validator made more sense. And
it works fine, and much easier to install on new servers. :).
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net
> I already looked at that page, and half way down it my head started spinning.
I know what you mean. The first time I installed w3c locally on my
server, I was pulling out hair. I didn't wanna go through the hassle
of installing on other intranet servers, so I just wrote my own PHP
based validator. Plus, in addition to XHTML/HTML I also wanted to
validate DocBook XML, so writing my own validator made more sense. And
it works fine, and much easier to install on new servers. :).
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net
Saqib Ali wrote: I just wrote my own PHP based validator. Plus, in addition to
XHTML/HTML
And is this released to the public? :-)
--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me) http://www.tsmchughs.com/
Saqib Ali wrote: I just wrote my own PHP based validator. Plus, in addition to
XHTML/HTML
And is this released to the public? :-)
--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me) http://www.tsmchughs.com/
In article <d2*************************@posting.google.com> , sa***@stonebeat.org (Saqib Ali) writes: of installing on other intranet servers, so I just wrote my own PHP
based validator.
Isn't that just slightly revisionist? Nothing against your validator,
but that's not quite how you were describing your motivation at the time.
Plus, in addition to XHTML/HTML I also wanted to
validate DocBook XML, so writing my own validator made more sense. And
it works fine, and much easier to install on new servers. :).
Your validator, in common with other HTML validators, uses OpenSP,
which has known limitations with XML. mod_validator, from
<URL:http://apache.webthing.com/>, has the edge in terms of supporting
different markup types, though it's not packaged for simple-install.
But for a single user, a desktop validator is likely to make more sense
than a webserver-based one. That leaves arealvalidator for windows,
or validator-lite for other platforms, as someone already said.
--
Nick Kew
Nick's manifesto: http://www.htmlhelp.com/~nick/
In article <d2*************************@posting.google.com> , sa***@stonebeat.org (Saqib Ali) writes: of installing on other intranet servers, so I just wrote my own PHP
based validator.
Isn't that just slightly revisionist? Nothing against your validator,
but that's not quite how you were describing your motivation at the time.
Plus, in addition to XHTML/HTML I also wanted to
validate DocBook XML, so writing my own validator made more sense. And
it works fine, and much easier to install on new servers. :).
Your validator, in common with other HTML validators, uses OpenSP,
which has known limitations with XML. mod_validator, from
<URL:http://apache.webthing.com/>, has the edge in terms of supporting
different markup types, though it's not packaged for simple-install.
But for a single user, a desktop validator is likely to make more sense
than a webserver-based one. That leaves arealvalidator for windows,
or validator-lite for other platforms, as someone already said.
--
Nick Kew
Nick's manifesto: http://www.htmlhelp.com/~nick/
Brian <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote in message news:<10*************@corp.supernews.com>... Saqib Ali wrote:
I just wrote my own PHP based validator. Plus, in addition to
XHTML/HTML
And is this released to the public? :-)
Here is the SourceForge webpage for the validator: http://sourceforge.net/projects/validate/
The first release is coming soon.
You test-drive the validator @ http://validate.sf.net
Brian <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote in message news:<10*************@corp.supernews.com>... Saqib Ali wrote:
I just wrote my own PHP based validator. Plus, in addition to
XHTML/HTML
And is this released to the public? :-)
Here is the SourceForge webpage for the validator: http://sourceforge.net/projects/validate/
The first release is coming soon.
You test-drive the validator @ http://validate.sf.net
> But for a single user, a desktop validator is likely to make more sense than a webserver-based one. That leaves arealvalidator for windows,
or validator-lite for other platforms, as someone already said.
hmm, for desktop validator, I think OpenSP or XSLTproc is better
option. They both are free, easy-to-use and included with all Linux
distros. I think it is included with MacOS X as well. You can d/l it
for free for windows.
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net
> But for a single user, a desktop validator is likely to make more sense than a webserver-based one. That leaves arealvalidator for windows,
or validator-lite for other platforms, as someone already said.
hmm, for desktop validator, I think OpenSP or XSLTproc is better
option. They both are free, easy-to-use and included with all Linux
distros. I think it is included with MacOS X as well. You can d/l it
for free for windows.
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net
> Isn't that just slightly revisionist? Nothing against your validator, but that's not quite how you were describing your motivation at the time.
hmm. i m not sure what you mean by this. Originally I didn't intend to
make a validate DocBook XMl content, but the motivation was to create
a validator that is simple to install, in 2 steps.
1) Install OpenSP. (which is no longer required on Linux, since most
Linux distro come with OpenSP).
2) GZip the PHP files.
And start validating your (X)HTML.
Later on I decided to include DocBook XML, and also added the ability
to convert DocBook XML to HTML/PDF.
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net
> Isn't that just slightly revisionist? Nothing against your validator, but that's not quite how you were describing your motivation at the time.
hmm. i m not sure what you mean by this. Originally I didn't intend to
make a validate DocBook XMl content, but the motivation was to create
a validator that is simple to install, in 2 steps.
1) Install OpenSP. (which is no longer required on Linux, since most
Linux distro come with OpenSP).
2) GZip the PHP files.
And start validating your (X)HTML.
Later on I decided to include DocBook XML, and also added the ability
to convert DocBook XML to HTML/PDF.
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net
Nick Kew wrote: for a single user, a desktop validator is likely to make more sense
than a webserver-based one.
I don't know, I'd like to have a way to install a validator on my
localhost-only Apache (which I use to test my sites). That would allow
me to more quickly check my work. I use Windows. I could try to download
the w3c code, and get all the components, but I haven't made time for
that yet. But if something simpler were to come along... :-)
--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me) http://www.tsmchughs.com/
Nick Kew wrote: for a single user, a desktop validator is likely to make more sense
than a webserver-based one.
I don't know, I'd like to have a way to install a validator on my
localhost-only Apache (which I use to test my sites). That would allow
me to more quickly check my work. I use Windows. I could try to download
the w3c code, and get all the components, but I haven't made time for
that yet. But if something simpler were to come along... :-)
--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me) http://www.tsmchughs.com/
CSE HTML Validator doesn't use the same engine as the W3 validator so the
results won't be the same. You might find this interesting, though: http://www.htmlvalidator.com/htmlval...eisbetter.html
--
Albert Wiersch http://www.htmlvalidator.com/
"Torbjørn Pettersen" <tpe AT broadpark DOT no> wrote in message
news:40******@news.broadpark.no... As you might have noticed I'm trying to clean up my web site's
HTML code. The way I do it is simply more or less redoing to
complete site, testing it on a web server I have set up on my
local network.
I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org. And I can't upload files to W3.org either,
due to all the ASP code I use.
So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server).
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction
www.fantafiction.com
CSE HTML Validator doesn't use the same engine as the W3 validator so the
results won't be the same. You might find this interesting, though: http://www.htmlvalidator.com/htmlval...eisbetter.html
--
Albert Wiersch http://www.htmlvalidator.com/
"Torbjørn Pettersen" <tpe AT broadpark DOT no> wrote in message
news:40******@news.broadpark.no... As you might have noticed I'm trying to clean up my web site's
HTML code. The way I do it is simply more or less redoing to
complete site, testing it on a web server I have set up on my
local network.
I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org. And I can't upload files to W3.org either,
due to all the ASP code I use.
So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server).
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction
www.fantafiction.com
"Albert Wiersch" <mr************************************@wiersch.co m>
wrote: CSE HTML Validator doesn't use the same engine as the W3 validator so
the results won't be the same.
As we have repeatedly pointed out, it is not a validator at all, and you
have read that and you have decided to keep advertizing it as a
validator. You have now reached a new level of bogosity with the babble
about "engine".
Validators do much less good than many people think and say. But surely a
commercial product that _has_ to be sold under a false name of a
validator is even less interesting.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
"Albert Wiersch" <mr************************************@wiersch.co m>
wrote: CSE HTML Validator doesn't use the same engine as the W3 validator so
the results won't be the same.
As we have repeatedly pointed out, it is not a validator at all, and you
have read that and you have decided to keep advertizing it as a
validator. You have now reached a new level of bogosity with the babble
about "engine".
Validators do much less good than many people think and say. But surely a
commercial product that _has_ to be sold under a false name of a
validator is even less interesting.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
In article <d2**************************@posting.google.com >, sa***@stonebeat.org (Saqib Ali) writes: But for a single user, a desktop validator is likely to make more sense
than a webserver-based one. That leaves arealvalidator for windows,
or validator-lite for other platforms, as someone already said.
hmm, for desktop validator, I think OpenSP or XSLTproc is better
option.
Those are commandline tools. validator-lite is just a GTK-based GUI
frontend to OpenSP, that takes care of the complexities that make it
intimidating to many users. And it's GPL (free) and easy-to-use.
They both are free, easy-to-use and included with all Linux
distros.
I think a lot of people find OpenSP challenging. Managing the SGMLDECL,
catalogue files and lib is not a simple task even for the computer-
literate unless they are working from a package such as one of the
validator distributions.
--
Nick Kew
Nick's manifesto: http://www.htmlhelp.com/~nick/
In article <d2**************************@posting.google.com >, sa***@stonebeat.org (Saqib Ali) writes: But for a single user, a desktop validator is likely to make more sense
than a webserver-based one. That leaves arealvalidator for windows,
or validator-lite for other platforms, as someone already said.
hmm, for desktop validator, I think OpenSP or XSLTproc is better
option.
Those are commandline tools. validator-lite is just a GTK-based GUI
frontend to OpenSP, that takes care of the complexities that make it
intimidating to many users. And it's GPL (free) and easy-to-use.
They both are free, easy-to-use and included with all Linux
distros.
I think a lot of people find OpenSP challenging. Managing the SGMLDECL,
catalogue files and lib is not a simple task even for the computer-
literate unless they are working from a package such as one of the
validator distributions.
--
Nick Kew
Nick's manifesto: http://www.htmlhelp.com/~nick/
In article <10*************@corp.supernews.com>,
Brian <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> writes: I don't know, I'd like to have a way to install a validator on my
localhost-only Apache (which I use to test my sites).
Fair enough - your choice.
I use Windows.
Compiling OpenSP for windows is not for the faint-hearted, though it's now
been done. Hmmm, now that I think about it, there's a project now at
sourcefirge to add a validation bar to MSIE using a locally-installed
OpenSP. Check Bjoern Hoehrmann's posts to www-validator over recent months.
I could try to download
the w3c code, and get all the components, but I haven't made time for
that yet. But if something simpler were to come along... :-)
Take your pick: w3c validator (Perl/CGI), WDG validator (Perl/CGI),
mod_validator (Apache module), or Saqib's PHP. One of these days
I'll grab Bjoern's OpenSP binary for windows and try building
mod_validator against it. That'll then be both the most powerful
and most efficient server-based validator, as it already is for
Unix/Linux.
--
Nick Kew
Nick's manifesto: http://www.htmlhelp.com/~nick/
In article <10*************@corp.supernews.com>,
Brian <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> writes: I don't know, I'd like to have a way to install a validator on my
localhost-only Apache (which I use to test my sites).
Fair enough - your choice.
I use Windows.
Compiling OpenSP for windows is not for the faint-hearted, though it's now
been done. Hmmm, now that I think about it, there's a project now at
sourcefirge to add a validation bar to MSIE using a locally-installed
OpenSP. Check Bjoern Hoehrmann's posts to www-validator over recent months.
I could try to download
the w3c code, and get all the components, but I haven't made time for
that yet. But if something simpler were to come along... :-)
Take your pick: w3c validator (Perl/CGI), WDG validator (Perl/CGI),
mod_validator (Apache module), or Saqib's PHP. One of these days
I'll grab Bjoern's OpenSP binary for windows and try building
mod_validator against it. That'll then be both the most powerful
and most efficient server-based validator, as it already is for
Unix/Linux.
--
Nick Kew
Nick's manifesto: http://www.htmlhelp.com/~nick/
"Brian" <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com... You might find this more interesting:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...eisbetter.html
There's nothing wrong with that as I've chosen to use some non-standard
markup. Some developers like to do that, while some don't. Unfortunately, if
you do like to do that, then the W3C validator may not be as useful.
I do try to use standard markup as much as possible, but sometimes there is
a reason to use something other than standard markup.
--
Albert Wiersch http://www.htmlvalidator.com/
"Brian" <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com... You might find this more interesting:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...eisbetter.html
There's nothing wrong with that as I've chosen to use some non-standard
markup. Some developers like to do that, while some don't. Unfortunately, if
you do like to do that, then the W3C validator may not be as useful.
I do try to use standard markup as much as possible, but sometimes there is
a reason to use something other than standard markup.
--
Albert Wiersch http://www.htmlvalidator.com/
"Jukka K. Korpela" <jk******@cs.tut.fi> wrote in message
news:Xn*****************************@193.229.0.31. .. "Albert Wiersch" <mr************************************@wiersch.co m>
wrote:
CSE HTML Validator doesn't use the same engine as the W3 validator so
the results won't be the same.
As we have repeatedly pointed out, it is not a validator at all, and you
have read that and you have decided to keep advertizing it as a
validator. You have now reached a new level of bogosity with the babble
about "engine".
Yes, it has been repeatedly pointed out that CSE HTML Validator is not a
validator in the strict, technical sense of the word. I never said that it
was. It is a validator in the common meaning of the word (what most people
think of when they think HTML Validator). I'm not going to continue to argue
about this, but it's important that people understand this. The program is
not marketed under a false name. Never has been, never will be. Look up
"validate" in a dictionary and you'll see that there's more than one
definition.
Validators do much less good than many people think and say.
It's interesting that you say this. That's why I created CSE HTML
Validator -- to be more useful and do more good than "real" ones like the
W3C validator, since it isn't limited to validating only to formal standards
that can be expressed in DTDs. So it's great if that's what you want and you
want to limit yourself to that. But if you want more, the W3C validator
can't give it to you.
Anyway, use what you want, but I don't think it's appropriate to trash a
great product just because you don't like the name.
--
Albert Wiersch http://www.htmlvalidator.com/
"Jukka K. Korpela" <jk******@cs.tut.fi> wrote in message
news:Xn*****************************@193.229.0.31. .. "Albert Wiersch" <mr************************************@wiersch.co m>
wrote:
CSE HTML Validator doesn't use the same engine as the W3 validator so
the results won't be the same.
As we have repeatedly pointed out, it is not a validator at all, and you
have read that and you have decided to keep advertizing it as a
validator. You have now reached a new level of bogosity with the babble
about "engine".
Yes, it has been repeatedly pointed out that CSE HTML Validator is not a
validator in the strict, technical sense of the word. I never said that it
was. It is a validator in the common meaning of the word (what most people
think of when they think HTML Validator). I'm not going to continue to argue
about this, but it's important that people understand this. The program is
not marketed under a false name. Never has been, never will be. Look up
"validate" in a dictionary and you'll see that there's more than one
definition.
Validators do much less good than many people think and say.
It's interesting that you say this. That's why I created CSE HTML
Validator -- to be more useful and do more good than "real" ones like the
W3C validator, since it isn't limited to validating only to formal standards
that can be expressed in DTDs. So it's great if that's what you want and you
want to limit yourself to that. But if you want more, the W3C validator
can't give it to you.
Anyway, use what you want, but I don't think it's appropriate to trash a
great product just because you don't like the name.
--
Albert Wiersch http://www.htmlvalidator.com/
"Albert Wiersch" <mr************************************@wiersch.co m> wrote
in message news:ts********************@august.net... Yes, it has been repeatedly pointed out that CSE HTML Validator is not a
validator in the strict, technical sense of the word. I never said that it
was. It is a validator in the common meaning of the word (what most people
think of when they think HTML Validator).
You could avoided this contentious issue if you had called your product the
CSE HTML Code Checker, or CSE HTML Lint program, or CSE HTML QC Toolkit, or
something more consistent with other, similar tools. Or if you had built a
real validator into your product, which users could use either separately or
in combination with your other code checks. Indeed, adding a true validator
to your product would both enhance its functionality and forever end this
kind of dispute.
"Albert Wiersch" <mr************************************@wiersch.co m> wrote
in message news:ts********************@august.net... Yes, it has been repeatedly pointed out that CSE HTML Validator is not a
validator in the strict, technical sense of the word. I never said that it
was. It is a validator in the common meaning of the word (what most people
think of when they think HTML Validator).
You could avoided this contentious issue if you had called your product the
CSE HTML Code Checker, or CSE HTML Lint program, or CSE HTML QC Toolkit, or
something more consistent with other, similar tools. Or if you had built a
real validator into your product, which users could use either separately or
in combination with your other code checks. Indeed, adding a true validator
to your product would both enhance its functionality and forever end this
kind of dispute.
Albert,
I understand the argument about empty TAGs (e.g. </p>), however empty
tags is well-formed according to XML standards.
A Validator, by definition, should only check for well-formedness and
validity. Anything beyond that, is not the function of the validator.
I really like CSE HTML Validator, but in real-life lot of sites use
empty tags, so CSE HTML validator generates tons of warning messages.
Just my .2 cents.
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net
"Albert Wiersch" <mr************************************@wiersch.co m> wrote in message news:<Lb********************@august.net>... CSE HTML Validator doesn't use the same engine as the W3 validator so the
results won't be the same. You might find this interesting, though:
http://www.htmlvalidator.com/htmlval...eisbetter.html
--
Albert Wiersch
http://www.htmlvalidator.com/
"Torbjørn Pettersen" <tpe AT broadpark DOT no> wrote in message
news:40******@news.broadpark.no... As you might have noticed I'm trying to clean up my web site's
HTML code. The way I do it is simply more or less redoing to
complete site, testing it on a web server I have set up on my
local network.
I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org. And I can't upload files to W3.org either,
due to all the ASP code I use.
So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server).
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction
www.fantafiction.com
Albert,
I understand the argument about empty TAGs (e.g. </p>), however empty
tags is well-formed according to XML standards.
A Validator, by definition, should only check for well-formedness and
validity. Anything beyond that, is not the function of the validator.
I really like CSE HTML Validator, but in real-life lot of sites use
empty tags, so CSE HTML validator generates tons of warning messages.
Just my .2 cents.
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net
"Albert Wiersch" <mr************************************@wiersch.co m> wrote in message news:<Lb********************@august.net>... CSE HTML Validator doesn't use the same engine as the W3 validator so the
results won't be the same. You might find this interesting, though:
http://www.htmlvalidator.com/htmlval...eisbetter.html
--
Albert Wiersch
http://www.htmlvalidator.com/
"Torbjørn Pettersen" <tpe AT broadpark DOT no> wrote in message
news:40******@news.broadpark.no... As you might have noticed I'm trying to clean up my web site's
HTML code. The way I do it is simply more or less redoing to
complete site, testing it on a web server I have set up on my
local network.
I have downloaded, and installed CSE HTML Validator Pro,
but I don't get the same results with that as I do with the online
validator on W3.org. And I can't upload files to W3.org either,
due to all the ASP code I use.
So, the question is, where can I find a validator that validates
like the one on W3.org? (Windows 2000 server).
--
Torbjørn Pettersen
Editor/Webmaster
FantaFiction
www.fantafiction.com
Albert Wiersch wrote: There's nothing wrong with that as I've chosen to use some non-standard
markup.
Why does the document claim that you conform the HTML 4.01 Transitional DTD
then? Why not use a DTD that includes your non-standard markup?
Some developers like to do that, while some don't. Unfortunately,
if you do like to do that, then the W3C validator may not be as useful.
Gosh! The validator might not be useful if you don't care if your code is
valid or not! What an insight!
I do try to use standard markup as much as possible, but sometimes there
is a reason to use something other than standard markup.
What's the reason for this then? The valign attribute is well supported when
applied to table data cells and table heading cells, and the vertical-align
property will allow you to:
..myTable * { vertical-align: middle; }
Not to mention that valign='middle' is the default anyway!
--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Albert Wiersch wrote: There's nothing wrong with that as I've chosen to use some non-standard
markup.
Why does the document claim that you conform the HTML 4.01 Transitional DTD
then? Why not use a DTD that includes your non-standard markup?
Some developers like to do that, while some don't. Unfortunately,
if you do like to do that, then the W3C validator may not be as useful.
Gosh! The validator might not be useful if you don't care if your code is
valid or not! What an insight!
I do try to use standard markup as much as possible, but sometimes there
is a reason to use something other than standard markup.
What's the reason for this then? The valign attribute is well supported when
applied to table data cells and table heading cells, and the vertical-align
property will allow you to:
..myTable * { vertical-align: middle; }
Not to mention that valign='middle' is the default anyway!
--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
"Saqib Ali" <sa***@stonebeat.org> wrote in message
news:d2*************************@posting.google.co m... Albert,
I really like CSE HTML Validator, but in real-life lot of sites use
empty tags, so CSE HTML validator generates tons of warning messages.
What are the warning messages you are referring to? CSE should be happy with
empty tags when used properly.
Thanks,
Albert
"Saqib Ali" <sa***@stonebeat.org> wrote in message
news:d2*************************@posting.google.co m... Albert,
I really like CSE HTML Validator, but in real-life lot of sites use
empty tags, so CSE HTML validator generates tons of warning messages.
What are the warning messages you are referring to? CSE should be happy with
empty tags when used properly.
Thanks,
Albert
"David Dorward" <do*****@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c5*******************@news.demon.co.uk... Albert Wiersch wrote:
There's nothing wrong with that as I've chosen to use some non-standard
markup.
Why does the document claim that you conform the HTML 4.01 Transitional
DTD then? Why not use a DTD that includes your non-standard markup?
Because I start with the closest standard DTD and add what I think is useful
from there. Do you really think that browsers care if I add an extra
attribute that they don't understand for the benefit of those using a
certain browser?
What's the reason for this then?
I do not remember the reason now. I put it in there years ago and there was
most likely a good reason. Are you willing to say that that attribute
doesn't have any effect in all the browsers and versions ever written? I
doubt it. Now I may very well decide to remove it in the future, but it was
put in for a reason. And neither can one say having it hurt anything, other
than an extra millisecond or so of page load time.
Albert
"David Dorward" <do*****@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c5*******************@news.demon.co.uk... Albert Wiersch wrote:
There's nothing wrong with that as I've chosen to use some non-standard
markup.
Why does the document claim that you conform the HTML 4.01 Transitional
DTD then? Why not use a DTD that includes your non-standard markup?
Because I start with the closest standard DTD and add what I think is useful
from there. Do you really think that browsers care if I add an extra
attribute that they don't understand for the benefit of those using a
certain browser?
What's the reason for this then?
I do not remember the reason now. I put it in there years ago and there was
most likely a good reason. Are you willing to say that that attribute
doesn't have any effect in all the browsers and versions ever written? I
doubt it. Now I may very well decide to remove it in the future, but it was
put in for a reason. And neither can one say having it hurt anything, other
than an extra millisecond or so of page load time.
Albert
> Yes, it has been repeatedly pointed out that CSE HTML Validator is not a validator in the strict, technical sense of the word. I never said that it
was. It is a validator in the common meaning of the word (what most people
think of when they think HTML Validator). I'm not going to continue to argue
about this, but it's important that people understand this. The program is
not marketed under a false name. Never has been, never will be. Look up
"validate" in a dictionary and you'll see that there's more than one
definition.
definitions are usually taken in context - The dictionay also says
friendship is a synonym for intimacy. That doesn't mean I am intimate
with Linus. :)
Getting back to XML:
A valid document conforms to the XML syntax rules and follows the
guidelines of a Document Type Definition (DTD), or in other word: A
valid XML document is well-formed and conforms to a XML DTD.
The process of comparing the XML document to the DTD is called
validation, which is performed using a validation parser (aka
validator).
In Peace,
Saqib Ali http://validate.sf.net This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: Torbjørn Pettersen |
last post by:
As you might have noticed I'm trying to clean up my web site's
HTML code. The way I do it is simply more or less redoing to
complete site, testing it on a web server I have set up on my
local...
|
by: James Owens |
last post by:
I maintain a small web page for internal company use. People access it
by typing "library" in their browser address bar; this defaults to
"http://library" which the network admin magically...
|
by: Niki Kovacs |
last post by:
Hi,
I'm an Austrian writer living in Montpezat (South France). I just installed
a local W3C validator on my machine (Slackware 10.1, local Apache server).
It's accessible as...
|
by: taylorcarr |
last post by:
A Canon printer is a smart device known for being advanced, efficient, and reliable. It is designed for home, office, and hybrid workspace use and can also be used for a variety of purposes. However,...
|
by: aa123db |
last post by:
Variable and constants
Use var or let for variables and const fror constants.
Var foo ='bar';
Let foo ='bar';const baz ='bar';
Functions
function $name$ ($parameters$) {
}
...
|
by: ryjfgjl |
last post by:
If we have dozens or hundreds of excel to import into the database, if we use the excel import function provided by database editors such as navicat, it will be extremely tedious and time-consuming...
|
by: emmanuelkatto |
last post by:
Hi All, I am Emmanuel katto from Uganda. I want to ask what challenges you've faced while migrating a website to cloud.
Please let me know.
Thanks!
Emmanuel
|
by: BarryA |
last post by:
What are the essential steps and strategies outlined in the Data Structures and Algorithms (DSA) roadmap for aspiring data scientists? How can individuals effectively utilize this roadmap to progress...
|
by: nemocccc |
last post by:
hello, everyone, I want to develop a software for my android phone for daily needs, any suggestions?
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven...
| |
