| Author |
 Topic  |
|
pweighill
Junior Member
United Kingdom
453 Posts |
 Posted - 12 August 2002 : 15:44:56
|
Were there any plans to make v3.4 more HTML standards compliant? If so then which version were you aiming for?
There are a copule of items that could be addressed to reduce the messages when checking with the http://validator.w3.org site.
You could add type="text/javascript" to the <script> tags. (See http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/scripts.html#edef-SCRIPT for details)
Also a lot of the <img> tags have align="absmiddle". What does absmiddle do? Can middle be used instead? |
|
|
OneWayMule
Dev. Team Member & Support Moderator
Austria
4969 Posts |
|
|
Roland
Advanced Member
Netherlands
9335 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 16:00:43
|
There's use of <b> and </b> tags aswell as <center> and </center> tags. Seeing how those are still there, the forums won't comply with the latest standards, which we shouldn't expect because of all the other things that have already been done (IMO).
Can't give a more definitive answer than that though. |
 |
|
|
RichardKinser
Snitz Forums Admin
USA
16655 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 16:15:11
|
No, there weren't any plans to make v3.4 HTML standards compliant.
absmiddle produces the cleanest alignment for text that is right next to an image. Netscape 4.7x doesn't like it, but that's something I can live with. |
|
|
|
RichardKinser
Snitz Forums Admin
USA
16655 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 16:17:17
|
Because this forum's output is dynamic, and because of the use of variables in the code, it will NEVER pass the validator at:
http://validator.w3.org/
Which is also something I can live with. I would rather have nicely formatted pages than "Standards Compliant" pages that don't look as nice. |
|
|
|
snaayk
Senior Member
USA
1061 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 16:17:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by RichardKinser
Netscape 4.7x doesn't like it, but that's something I can live with.
What does NS 4.7 like? I quit worrying about 4.7....my visitors will have to upgrade or go elsewhere  |
|
|
|
pweighill
Junior Member
United Kingdom
453 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 16:30:42
|
It's usually quite a bit of work to make it go through the validator but it's still nice to try and reduce the "problems" to a minmium.
The change to the <script> tag wouldn't take much to do. |
Edited by - pweighill on 12 August 2002 16:31:59 |
|
|
|
RichardKinser
Snitz Forums Admin
USA
16655 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 16:38:03
|
so your saying change:
<script language="javascript">
to:
<script type="text/javascript"> |
|
|
|
GauravBhabu
Advanced Member
4288 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 17:11:37
|
| <Script type="text/javascript"> will not give error when validating HTML at W3C. |
CSS and HTML4.01 Compilant Snitz Forum . ForumSquare . Rakesh Jain
It is difficult to IMPROVE on Perfection, There is no harm in Keep Trying.
Prayer Of Forgiveness "I forgive all living beings. May all living beings forgive me!
I cherish the friendliness towards all and harbour enmity towards none." -- Aavashyaka Sutra(Translated) |
|
|
|
pweighill
Junior Member
United Kingdom
453 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 17:28:06
|
Change:
<script language="javascript">
to
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
|
|
|
|
Doug G
Support Moderator
USA
6493 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 19:32:20
|
If the forum displays properly in all the targeted browsers, does it matter if the validator gives errors or not?
my favorite validator is users.org
|
======
Doug G
======
Computer history and help at www.dougscode.com |
|
|
|
VodkaFish
Average Member
USA
654 Posts |
Posted - 12 August 2002 : 22:55:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by RichardKinser
I would rather have nicely formatted pages than "Standards Compliant" pages that don't look as nice.
Hear, hear! W3C may have "standards", but if something works well (in almost all browsers) and looks nicer, it's the way to go. |
v ø d k â f ï § h |
|
|
|
D3mon
Senior Member
United Kingdom
1685 Posts |
Posted - 14 August 2002 : 10:28:34
|
| I had been working on 'converting' v.3.3.0.3 to XHTML and was doing very well up until the inc_functions code part where it corrects the posted code and puts in the appropriate fonts/colours/smilies etc. I gave up then cause I screwed up the all the post-formatting stuff! |
Snitz 'Speedball' : Site Integration Mod : Friendly Registration Mod
"In war, the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won" |
|
|
|
laser
Advanced Member
Australia
3859 Posts |
Posted - 14 August 2002 : 17:13:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by pweighill
It's usually quite a bit of work to make it go through the validator but it's still nice to try and reduce the "problems" to a minmium.
The change to the <script> tag wouldn't take much to do.
Aren't most of these problems caused by deprecation ? I get sick of trying to keep up with what's currently "in" and what's been deprecated.
I'm with Richard - if it works in all targeted browsers then so what ? Some browsers don't even recognise all the latest HTML rules. |
|
|
|
Maarten
Starting Member
Netherlands
22 Posts |
Posted - 14 August 2002 : 17:40:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doug G
If the forum displays properly in all the targeted browsers, does it matter if the validator gives errors or not?
my favorite validator is users.org
Well i don't know exactly how things are now but it didn't parse the html tables correctly in Opera. May be that has been fixed. But i'd sure check the forum in some browser versions (most important mozilla, netscape 4.xx and Opera). |
A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Senior Member
USA
1790 Posts |
Posted - 14 August 2002 : 18:19:17
|
quote:
most important mozilla, netscape 4.xx and Opera
Just consider IE an "also ran" and skip it?
@tomic |
SportsBettingAcumen.com |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
