Re: Peculiar error count

Paul Nelson wrote, On 2/28/2009 7:07 PM:
>    No problem--making light of it might be the most realistic approach 
> after all.
>
>    The 'cascade' of errors really can be amazing, this just happened 
> to be the most extreme case I've come across. I wasn't thinking of a 
> mind-reading program (how much harder to write?) so much as a 
> differentiated count at the top of the report, perhaps just separating 
> out the number of errors from the instances of XML parsing errors that 
> go with them. (I believe in a variation of the theme it's occasionally 
> given as x number of errors and y number of 'warnings' ... which also 
> sounds odd, come to think of it.) I wouldn't want to get rid of any of 
> it, just have a better notion in advance of the scope of the problem.
>
>    Of course, I felt very proud of myself, knocking off 14 'errors' in 
> a single stroke ... but must admit that the 'error' was very clearly 
> identified, I could hardly have missed.
>
>    Thanks for the response -- Paul
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lou King" <lking <at> knob.com>
Paul,

Examples are tough, but what the parser though you meant would change 
which following errors were "new" or part of the resulting cascade.

Take something like spell/grammar checker (I couldn't live without 
them).  If the parser comes across "theare" depending on whether you 
should have typed, 'there', 'their' or 'they're' it would have an impact 

Re: Validate pages while navigating

On Sat, 28 Feb 2009 16:55:39 +0100
Came this utterance formulated by Justin M. to my mailbox:

> Hello everybody,
> 
> I may have an idea which could be interesting for all the 
> webdesigners/webdevelopers, and I would present it to you all.
> 
> The W3 validator works page by page, which is totally normal because 
> several pages cannot be validated at the same time. But when we have 
> validated one, we have to switch to our site, navigate towards an
> other page, copy and paste its address, and validate. No really
> difficult that is right, but I think it could be great to keep the
> ability to navigate AND to validate the current page. I thought about
> a Google-like presentation when we search for an image : a frame at
> the top, containning a summary of the validate result, and the page
> itself (or the contrary, because it may be easier to include the
> source page in the validator than to include the validator in the
> client site). The complete report will be viewable by clicking a link,
> which brings to the result page like today :
> "http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=" + referer. I do not really know
> if it simple to develop or not, actually that is just an idea! May be
> there are problems of interaction between the two websites...
> 

This would increase the load on the online validator. Instead i suggest
using the validation built into other tools like the web developer
extension for firefox:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/60
This works faster because it validates (X)HTML, CSS and JavaScript while

Re: Validate pages while navigating

Justin M. wrote:
> I thought about a Google-like presentation when we search for an
> image : a frame at the top, containning a summary of the validate
> result, and the page itself (or the contrary, because it may be
> easier to include the source page in the validator than to include
> the validator in the client site).

This is impossible to do in the normal context of the WWW, since
security prevents a script running in one frame from accessing the URL
of a page in another frame if that page exists on a different domain.

It is possible with browser plugins, but if you are going to start down
that route, you might as well build a validator into the plugin itself,
since that would be more efficient.

http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/ for example.

(Please direct responses to the www-validator mailing list, and not
directly to me)

--

-- 
David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>

Re: Validate pages while navigating

W3C validator accessed by WML and XHTML-MP mobile phones.

Dear W3C,

I apologize if this topical has been consider elsewhere or I am raising 
a topic which should be addressed elsewhere.

Is there any merit or thoughts on the benefits of being able to access 
the W3C validator via a mobile phone?
Not so much the iPhone over Wifi, I'm thinking about all the GSM, GPRS 
and CDMA mobile phones using their native browsers which  'pay'  for 
their bandwidth.
I'm considering the WML and XHTML-MP 1.2 markup as an access document 
type with mobile best practice content sent to the mobile phone.

Is the current complexities and diaignostics requirements of the W3C 
validation service and the content returned, beyond the realistic 
capabilities of a mobile phone circa 2004/2005 using a native browser.

Is it seen that the God of downloadable mobile browsers in the form of 
Opera Mini 4.2, sufficient to meet the requirements of nearly all mobile 
phones and that any mobile bespoke access module would only have a 
limited audience and out weight any development cost/time. (~25KB to 
validate a document from start to finish on Opera Mini 4.2)

Compare this to loading a bespoke css and xhtml-mp validation front-end 
document (including HTTP headers) to check the validation of one 
document and the data used may be the same or even more.

However there may be a case for WML which could maintain a minimal data 
footprint and despite WML fading from mainstream use,
can still account for the majority of mobile traffic from emerging nations.

What would be key for a mobile phone client wishing to access W3C 
validation and still make the service functional?

I would be interest in the thoughts of the W3C validation community on 
this topic.

Regards
Tom Rush

Add Subject Here

Validating using a referer URL (Was: Add Subject Here)

Jeroen Coelen wrote:
> On jeroencoelen.nl <http://jeroencoelen.nl> i've valid css and html.

It's "/referer" not "/referer/"

(Please direct responses to www-validator, not directly to me, and use
more useful subject lines, thanks)

--

-- 
David Dorward                               <http://dorward.me.uk/>

Validation

It is aparent that W3C does not know HTM 4.0 languahe. I tested a page 
just now and is perfect. However, the "validator" says there were 
warnings and errors in it. Kept sugesting CSS and Xhtml junk.

Its the validator site which in in error using java and style sheets! 
Which is not HTM protocols.

I looked at the valadating page andsaw many errors in it!

If you want to look at my page go to http://pages.suddenlink.net/kb8qeu/ 
and see for yourself that it is perfect htm coding.

It is those pages that has Java, stylesheets, ablets, <span></span>, and 
other non-htm coding, that prevents 70 to 75 precent internet users from 
using the internet. Of those there is 60 to 70 precent relys on other 
world wide networks that does not rely on GUI.

I've been involved in computers since 77 when the first "PC" came out as 
Personal Electronic Terminal came out in kit form. And had the one ofthe 
first five BBS's up and operational in 81.

So I'm tired of the deviation of the HTM coding from the origional 
wordstar inbeded codings, which is the engin of htm codes.

Well thanks for letting me vent.
Ed

problem with empty tbody

Hello,

Many dynamic webpages have empty tbody

<tbody id="tbody1"></tbody>

tbody is empty because it is inserting from JS_DOM+AJAX after page contents loading.

W3C validator say - error: empty tbody
I think, tbody with no rows should be accepted.

Best Regards,
Lunter

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Teraz gry" - program dla prawdziwych graczy! >>> http://link.interia.pl/f2080

Re: Validation

kb8qeu wrote:
> It is aparent that W3C does not know HTM 4.0 languahe. I tested a page
> just now and is perfect. However, the "validator" says there were
> warnings and errors in it. Kept sugesting CSS and Xhtml junk.

More likely, you are confusing "HTML 4.0" with "What errors commonly
used browsers tend to recover from".

> Its the validator site which in in error using java and style sheets!
> Which is not HTM protocols.

JavaScript and CSS embedded in a webpage using script and style elements
or intrinsic event and style attributes must follow the rules for those
elements and attributes.

> I looked at the valadating page andsaw many errors in it!

If you think you have found errors with the client side code at
http://validator.w3.org/ - then please file specific bug reports rather
then simply claiming "many errors". I doesn't seem likely that they have
a significant number of problems.

> If you want to look at my page go to http://pages.suddenlink.net/kb8qeu/
> and see for yourself that it is perfect htm coding.

No, I wouldn't describe that as perfect.

> It is those pages that has Java, stylesheets, ablets, <span></span>, and
> other non-htm coding, that prevents 70 to 75 precent internet users from
> using the internet. 

No. It is perfectly possible to remain accessible while using modern
technologies - they just have to be used correctly.

(Please direct follow-ups to the www-validator mailing list, and not
directly to me)
--

-- 
David Dorward                               <http://dorward.me.uk/>