-------
Line 47, column 8: there is no attribute "id"
<DIV id="LeftNavigation" style="position:absolute; left:8px; top:6px;
width:200p
-------
Line 47, column 31: there is no attribute "style"
<DIV id="LeftNavigation" style="position:absolute; left:8px; top:6px;
width:200p
-------
Line 47, column 127: element "DIV" undefined
....1250px; z-index:1; overflow:visible;">
-------
These are just three of 272 errors that I got when I validated my
site, http://www.zeonline.net/. I'm using a valid XHTML 1.0
Transistional DOCTYPE statement. You can check the beginning of the
source code if you want:
-------Source Code: http://www.zeonline.net/-------
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.zeonline.net/zeonline.css"
type="text/css"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="#newsFormatting" type="text/css"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en-us"
lang="en-us" dir="ltr">
-------(more...)-------
Something tells me that the validator is messed up. All of my tags
are lowercase, but the validator shows them as uppercase. I use
Dreamweaver MX 2002 to create my sites. Program bug? Validator
problem? Or did I just miss something?
--
Colin http://www.zeonline.net/ 17  3970 
On 11/8/04 10:21 am, Colin Cogle wrote: Something tells me that the validator is messed up. All of my tags
are lowercase, but the validator shows them as uppercase. I use
Dreamweaver MX 2002 to create my sites. Program bug? Validator
problem? Or did I just miss something?
Your tags are *not* all lowercase.
And you appear to be missing *lots* of other things besides. The validator
seems to have generated a pretty comprehensive list of your problems, so I
won't bother listing them here.
I suggest you read up on how to include Javascript in XHTML documents for a
start. And then perhaps you could correct the errors in your href attributes
(hint: "..showflat.php?Cat=mber=624816&page=1.." should be
"..showflat.php?Cat=mber=624816&page=1.." , etc.)
Have fun!
Phil
--
Philip Ronan ph***********@virgin.net
(Please remove the "z"s if replying by email) Ma**********@earthlink.net (Colin Cogle) wrote: -------
Line 47, column 8: there is no attribute "id"
<DIV id="LeftNavigation" style="position:absolute; left:8px; top:6px;
width:200p
-------
Line 47, column 31: there is no attribute "style"
<DIV id="LeftNavigation" style="position:absolute; left:8px; top:6px;
width:200p
These two are due to the next one:
-------
Line 47, column 127: element "DIV" undefined
...1250px; z-index:1; overflow:visible;">
-------
There is no element DIV in XHTML, thus it can't have any attributes
and hence the earlier two errors. There is an element div though.
Remember that XHTML, unlike HTML, requires lowercase element and
attribute names.
These are just three of 272 errors that I got when I validated my
site, http://www.zeonline.net/.
Something tells me that the validator is messed up. All of my tags
are lowercase, but the validator shows them as uppercase.
A view source shows them as uppercase, so the problem seems to be with
your code not the validator.
Most of the upprcase tags are between the comments
<!-- Begin LeftNavigation SSI --> and <!-- End SSI -->
so it looks like your forgot to make the contents of your include
XHTML compatible. (There's also one uppercase <SCRIPT></SCRIPT> after
the latter comment.)
Steve
--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor
Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
Colin Cogle wrote:
<snip>
Something tells me that the validator is messed up. All of my tags
are lowercase, but the validator shows them as uppercase.
No they're not. Just scroll down past the <body> statement.
I use Dreamweaver MX 2002 to create my sites. Program bug? Validator
problem? Or did I just miss something?
Probably missed a load of things. That's what the validator is telling you!
On 11/8/04 10:37 am, Philip Ronan wrote: (hint: "..showflat.php?Cat=mber=624816&page=1.." should be
"..showflat.php?Cat=mber=624816&page=1.." , etc.)
Hmm, I seem to have copied another bug from your source code -- what on
earth is that control character (??) doing between "Cat=" and "mber="
Perhaps you should try using a different editor.
--
Philip Ronan ph***********@virgin.net
(Please remove the "z"s if replying by email)
Colin Cogle wrote: Something tells me that the validator is messed up. All of my tags
are lowercase, but the validator shows them as uppercase. I use
Dreamweaver MX 2002 to create my sites. Program bug? Validator
problem? Or did I just miss something?
Validator doesn't have many bugs. There are some, but none, AFAICT,
are causing your problems. The editor is good, I use Dreamweaver and
only have problems when I attempt to do something in the GUI editor.
For hand coding, it's great! The problem is most definately with your
html, and javascript (though, the script isn't causing your validation
errors)
The easiest way to fix problems in validator is one at a time. It
helps if you use verbose mode, with the show source option. In the
future, I recommend validating more often, as you author it, and write
new documents with a stict doctype. That way, you can fix them as you
go (2 or 3 each time, instead of 272 all at once!), and you'll quickly
learn to spot and fix the common problems without needing to validate so
often
Regarding your use of JavaScript, document.write() does not work for
XHTML documents. Hixie explains why [1]. If you're only going to serve
your document as text/html, and continue to use document.write() then
it's better to use HTML 4 Strict [2].
You should learn to write script that uses the DOM instead.
W3Schools has some reasonable tutorials on scripting, and the DOM [3].
Or, you can just dive straight into the specifications and other W3C
information about it [4]. The DevEdge sidebar [5] for Netscape, Mozilla
and Firefox has a very good quick reference for all the DOM methods and
attributes, as well as CSS, JavaScript and HTML.
[1] http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1091626816&count=1
[2] http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml
[3] http://www.w3schools.com/
[4] http://www.w3.org/DOM/
[5] http://devedge.netscape.com/toolbox/sidebars/
--
Lachlan Hunt http://www.lachy.id.au/
Please direct all spam to ab***@127.0.0.1
Thank you.
Well, I converted it to HTML 4.01 Transistional and fixed a few more
errors. Now it's valid code! My stylesheet is also valid, too. I'm
going to go through all of the pages and validate them as well.
Thanks for the help. Now I know that for straight HTML, XHTML sucks.
Just two more questions.
(1) What's the difference between HTML 4.01 Transistional and Strict?
I don't suppose one is better?
(2) The validator doesn't seem to want to validate my RSS news feed.
Can it? RSS, for those out of the loop, is just XML, and I do have
the <?xml...?> tag first in the file.
( http://www.zeonline.net/rss.xml)
--
Colin http://www.zeonline.net/
Colin Cogle wrote: What's the difference between HTML 4.01 Transistional and Strict?
Transitional includes certain presentational elements and attributes
that have been deprecated, and thus removed from strict.
I don't suppose one is better?
Generally, Tranisitional is meant for legacy documents. For new
documents, it is better to use HTML 4 strict. Save the presentation for CSS.
--
Brian (remove ".invalid" to email me) http://www.tsmchughs.com/
On 12 Aug 2004 20:11:39 -0700, Colin Cogle <Ma**********@earthlink.net>
wrote: (1) What's the difference between HTML 4.01 Transistional and Strict?
I don't suppose one is better?
Oversimplified, Transitional includes most of the presentational markup
from HTML 3.2, Strict does not allow most presentational elements.
Documents with Strict DTDs are parsed by some browsers in a more
standards-respecting manner than those with Transitional DTDs. And
Transitional is best when upgrading an old-school document, then when the
deprecated elements have been removed one can change the DTD to Strict.
(2) The validator doesn't seem to want to validate my RSS news feed.
Can it? RSS, for those out of the loop, is just XML, and I do have
the <?xml...?> tag first in the file.
(http://www.zeonline.net/rss.xml)
What validator are you referring to? The above file shows no errors AFAICS.
On 12 Aug 2004 20:11:39 -0700, Colin Cogle <Ma**********@earthlink.net>
wrote: (2) The validator doesn't seem to want to validate my RSS news feed.
Can it? RSS, for those out of the loop, is just XML, and I do have
the <?xml...?> tag first in the file.
(http://www.zeonline.net/rss.xml)
Apologies for the off-topic post. I want to learn more about RSS and what
it does. I've seen a few websites which discuss it, but am curious: Who
really uses this? Is there one version ofr another that's best for a
particular application? Is this something that is useful for "any" site
which lists events and noteworthy updates?
I don't expect a discussion here. Please provide a pointer to where that
discussion might take place. I find no RSS newsgroups, and I have yet to
determine the XML newsgroup where the responses to this type and level of
question would be most lucent.
On 12 Aug 2004 20:11:39 -0700, Ma**********@earthlink.net (Colin
Cogle) wrote: (2) The validator doesn't seem to want to validate my RSS news feed.
So why not ? What's it complaining about ?
http://feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?u....net%2Frss.xml
v> Sorry This feed does not validate.
v> line 40, column 1: Undefined item element: image [help]
v> <image>
seems pretty clear to me - there's an <image> element in RSS 0.91, but
it's not allowed as a child of <item>
I do have the <?xml...?> tag first in the file.
This is the prolog, not a "tag". And it's not essential either
(although a good idea to use it)
(http://www.zeonline.net/rss.xml)
If asking for advice on RSS feeds (or anything dynamic), please take a
_static_ copy and give us a URL to that. The content of your dynamic
feed may often change and it's a common problem in helping out RSS
problems posted to Usenet that the feed with the problem is no longer
quite the same when others try to look at it.
--
Smert' spamionam
Colin Cogle wrote: (1) What's the difference between HTML 4.01 Transistional and Strict?
I don't suppose one is better?
Transitional includes all the deprecated elements, but it also has
different content models for some elements, such as <body>, <form>, etc...
eg.
for strict:
<!ELEMENT BODY O O (%block;|SCRIPT)+ +(INS|DEL) -- document body -->
but for transitional:
<!ELEMENT BODY O O (%flow;)* +(INS|DEL) -- document body -->
This can cause problems if you're attempting to migrate transitional
documents from transitional to strict. It's better to always author in
strict so you don't run into any problems later on.
Also, the doctype affects the rendering mode of the UA. for Mozilla,
there's 3 modes: Standards, Almost Standards and Quirks. Transitional
and frameset doctypes use Almost Standards, and the strict use full
standards. See Mozilla's DOCTYPE sniffing [3] for more info about the
differences:
(2) The validator doesn't seem to want to validate my RSS news feed.
Can it? RSS, for those out of the loop, is just XML, and I do have
the <?xml...?> tag first in the file.
(http://www.zeonline.net/rss.xml)
How can it validate a file with no DTD or schema? The xml prologue,
<?xml ...?>, only serves to identify the version, encoding and whether
or not it's a standalone document. Without a DTD or Schema, a validator
can only check for well-formedness, but any modern browser will do that
when it opens it for you anyway.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/strict.dtd
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd
[3] http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-deve.../doctypes.html
--
Lachlan Hunt http://www.lachy.id.au/
Please direct all spam to ab***@127.0.0.1
Thank you.
Lachlan Hunt wrote: Also, the doctype affects the rendering mode of the UA. for Mozilla,
there's 3 modes: Standards, Almost Standards and Quirks. Transitional
and frameset doctypes use Almost Standards, and the strict use full
standards. See Mozilla's DOCTYPE sniffing [3] for more info about the
differences:
I have never seen "Almost Standards" mode on any page I tested for
validation? I get Quirks Mode for valid Transitional and framset pages
and Standard for valid 4.01 Strict and XHTML, looking thrue the "View >
Page Info".
--
Arne
Arne wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Also, the doctype affects the rendering mode of the UA. for Mozilla,
there's 3 modes: Standards, Almost Standards and Quirks. Transitional
and frameset doctypes use Almost Standards, and the strict use full
standards. See Mozilla's DOCTYPE sniffing [3] for more info about the
differences:
I have never seen "Almost Standards" mode on any page I tested for
validation? I get Quirks Mode for valid Transitional and framset pages
and Standard for valid 4.01 Strict and XHTML, looking thrue the "View >
Page Info".
It was introduced because the reality is that many pages that use
HTML and XHTML Transitional depend on IE's quirks to render correctly.
At least that's what Hixie told me in a private email. There's not much
difference in Mozilla between the two modes, it's just the inline box
model that differs. See this test [1] using HTML 4.01 Transitional.
Also, view the page info on that, and it will show standards compliance
mode (it will never show "Almost Standards Mode"). You get quirks when
you use HTML 4 transitional without a system identifier. You should
also note that any document sent as XML rather than text/html,
regardless of which XHTML doctype is used, will always render in
standards mode.
Look through that doctype sniffing page I sent previously [2]; it
lists every doctype known to mozilla and which modes it triggers. If
your interested, you can also take a look at how Opera [3] and IE [4]
use doctype sniffing. All browsers (except IE, of course) use full
standards mode for strict doctypes. (Run IE through mozilla's
compatibility mode tests [1|2], and you'll see what I mean)
[1] http://dbaron.org/mozilla/tests/comp...oose.dtd%22%3E
[2] http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-deve.../doctypes.html
[3] http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/doctype/index.dml
[4] http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...hancements.asp
--
Lachlan Hunt http://www.lachy.id.au/
Please direct all spam to ab***@127.0.0.1
Thank you.
Lachlan Hunt <la**********@lachy.id.au.invalid> wrote in
news:dp*******************@news-server.bigpond.net.au: Also, the doctype affects the rendering mode of the UA. for Mozilla,
there's 3 modes: Standards, Almost Standards and Quirks.
I have never seen "Almost Standards" mode on any page I tested for
validation?
It was introduced because the reality is that many pages that use
HTML and XHTML Transitional depend on IE's quirks to render correctly.
At least that's what Hixie told me in a private email. There's not
much difference in Mozilla between the two modes, it's just the inline
box model that differs. See this test [1] using HTML 4.01
[1]
http://dbaron.org/mozilla/tests/comp...YPE+HTML+PUBLI
C+%22-%2F%2FW3C%2F%2FDTD+HTML+4.01+Transitional%2F%2FEN% 22+%22http%3A%2
F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fhtml4%2Floose.dtd%22%3E
However, is that really a proper test page,
when it doesn't pass validation?
--
Dave Patton
Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project http://www.confluence.org/
My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/
Dave Patton wrote: [1]
http://dbaron.org/mozilla/tests/comp...YPE+HTML+PUBLI
C+%22-%2F%2FW3C%2F%2FDTD+HTML+4.01+Transitional%2F%2FEN% 22+%22http%3A%2
F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fhtml4%2Floose.dtd%22%3E
However, is that really a proper test page,
when it doesn't pass validation?
It's a test page for a browser feature designed to handle invalid
markup, and demonstate the differences in parsing and rendering for the
different modes. How else would it be possible to test the parsing of
invalid markup without writing a page using invalid markup?
--
Lachlan Hunt http://www.lachy.id.au/
Please direct all spam to ab***@127.0.0.1
Thank you.
Lachlan Hunt <la**********@lachy.id.au.invalid> wrote in
news:J3*******************@news-server.bigpond.net.au: Dave Patton wrote:[1]
http://dbaron.org/mozilla/tests/comp...YPE+HTML+PUBLI
C+%22-%2F%2FW3C%2F%2FDTD+HTML+4.01+Transitional%2F%2FEN% 22+%22http%3A%2
F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fhtml4%2Floose.dtd%22%3E
However, is that really a proper test page,
when it doesn't pass validation?
It's a test page for a browser feature designed to handle invalid
markup, and demonstate the differences in parsing and rendering for the
different modes. How else would it be possible to test the parsing of
invalid markup without writing a page using invalid markup?
OK, I must be missing something. This page: http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-deve.../doctypes.html
lists the above URL as the third example in the
"Almost Standards Mode" section of a page talking about
"Mozilla's DOCTYPE sniffing". I get that the example page
uses The public identifier "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN",
with a system identifier, and that that triggers Mozilla to use
"Almost Standards Mode", which shows in the browser's page
information as "Standards compliance mode".
What I don't see is why the validation errors for the example
page are relevant to the example being shown?
If I take a copy of the page, add a meta tag to specify a
character set, add the missing alt attribute, and put the
javascript into a comment block, I get a page that validates,
and otherwise appears to present in the same manner.
What am I missing?
Thanks
--
Dave Patton
Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project http://www.confluence.org/
My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/
Neal wrote:
Apologies for the off-topic post. I want to learn more about RSS and
what it does.
See <http://www.commoncraft.com/archives/000528.html> This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics | |
by: Bruce W...1 |
last post by:
I don't seem to be getting anywhere with trying to make my web page
transitional XHTML.
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"...
|
by: Werner Partner |
last post by:
I put this question already, but erhaps it "came under the wheels"
because it was hidden in another thread. Nevertheless it's important for
me to understand the problem and solve it.
Old html...
|
by: mike |
last post by:
regards:
I follow the following steps to converting from HTML to XHTML
http://webpageworkshop.co.uk/main/xhtml_converting
My parser is http://htmlparser.sourceforge.net/
Xhtml version is 1.0...
|
by: Chuck |
last post by:
Is there any logical reason why one should convert if css is already being
used?
What possible, immediate, benefit would there be? I am at a loss to see
what, pragmatic, difference it would make.
|
by: Alex D. |
last post by:
How can I stop asp.net from rendering XHTML istead of HTML?
My javascripts are rendering wrong because of that. It is rendering & to
clients instead of &.
Any help?
Thanks,
Alejandro.
| | |
by: wardy1975 |
last post by:
Hi All,
Looking for a little expert advice on a few web standards issues. I am
currently trying to understand the impact of web standards for a web
application I work with. I have been doing a...
|
by: Peter Williams |
last post by:
Hello,
If my html is valid XHTML accroding to http://validator.w3.org/, does
thuis mean it is also valid (4.0.1) Html?
Thanks in Advance
|
by: VK |
last post by:
Can well-formed but non-validated XHTML have extra namespaces?
Say
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />...
|
by: Dick Watson |
last post by:
I had a page that works when setup like this:
===
<form name="frmCalc" action="">
<script type="text/javascript">
function btnCalc_onclick(abc) {
return "got here with " + abc;
}
|
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...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing,...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new...
|
by: adsilva |
last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated ...
| | |
by: bsmnconsultancy |
last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence...
| | |
