Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > validation

Reply
Thread Tools

validation

 
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003
Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
validate, due to name not being an attribute, what else can be used to
obtain the same effect?
Or another type of declaration that would still allow the attribute and css?



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
rf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003

"Richard" <anom@anom> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
> validate, due to name not being an attribute,


That's correct. The name attribute applies to anchors. You can't just make
things up and expect them to do something

> what else can be used to
> obtain the same effect?


What effect?

> Or another type of declaration that would still allow the attribute and

css?

Try letting us know exactly what you are trying do to.

Cheers
Richard.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
m
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003
Richard wrote:
> Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
> validate, due to name not being an attribute, what else can be used to
> obtain the same effect?
> Or another type of declaration that would still allow the attribute and css?
>
>
>

Use ' id="test" ' -- although some older browsers may still prefer
'name' for things like image rollovers in JavaScript.

--
m

 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003
rf wrote:


> "Richard" <anom@anom> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
>> validate, due to name not being an attribute,


> That's correct. The name attribute applies to anchors. You can't just
> make
> things up and expect them to do something


well young one, there was a time when "name" was accepted as an attribute
with img.


>> what else can be used to
>> obtain the same effect?


> What effect?


Pay attention young grasshopper.

>> Or another type of declaration that would still allow the attribute
>> and

> css?


> Try letting us know exactly what you are trying do to.


Already have. Obviously your memory lacks to maintain itself beyond a few
minutes.


> Cheers
> Richard.




 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003
m wrote:

> Richard wrote:
>> Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
>> validate, due to name not being an attribute, what else can be used to
>> obtain the same effect?
>> Or another type of declaration that would still allow the attribute
>> and css?




> Use ' id="test" ' -- although some older browsers may still prefer
> 'name' for things like image rollovers in JavaScript.


Tried that. I get a script error.
The editor I'm using shows a listing of tags and attributes, name is not
shown for img although it works.
The wdg validator doesn't like the <img name> attribute either.
Which is now the only error I get in validating.


> --
> m



 
Reply With Quote
 
rf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003

"Richard" <anom@anom> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> rf wrote:
>
>
> > "Richard" <anom@anom> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
> >> validate, due to name not being an attribute,

>
> > That's correct. The name attribute applies to anchors. You can't just
> > make
> > things up and expect them to do something

>
> well young one, there was a time when "name" was accepted as an attribute
> with img.


Well it's not in the HTML 4 spec and that was published almost 6 years ago
but then again I suppose you haven't read it yet have you?

> >> what else can be used to
> >> obtain the same effect?

>
> > What effect?

>
> Pay attention young grasshopper.


Condescending bastard.

> >> Or another type of declaration that would still allow the attribute
> >> and

> > css?

>
> > Try letting us know exactly what you are trying do to.

>
> Already have. Obviously your memory lacks to maintain itself beyond a few
> minutes.


Not in this thread you bloody haven't. I don't usually read your posts
anyway as they are usually crap. I just wondered why someone was posting to
a thread that is almost a month old. I see why, now, the totally
uninformative subject of "validation" caused my newsreader to lump your post
in with that prior thread.

You, sir, should go out and get some education in netiquette.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark Parnell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003
Sometime around Wed, 8 Oct 2003 22:30:17 -0500, Richard is reported to have
stated:

> rf wrote:
>
>> "Richard" <anom@anom> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
>>> validate, due to name not being an attribute,

>
>> That's correct. The name attribute applies to anchors. You can't just
>> make
>> things up and expect them to do something

>
> well young one,


Chances are Richard is older than you (no offense, Richard - rf that is
[this could get confusing!]).

> there was a time when "name" was accepted as an attribute
> with img.
>


Really? Which specs is that in? I can't find it in HTML4, 3.2 or even 2.

>
>>> what else can be used to
>>> obtain the same effect?

>
>> What effect?

>
> Pay attention young grasshopper.
>


To what, exactly? See my comments above re: age.

>>> Or another type of declaration that would still allow the attribute
>>> and css?

>>
>> Try letting us know exactly what you are trying do to.

>
> Already have. Obviously your memory lacks to maintain itself beyond a few
> minutes.
>


Have you? Well I missed it too, then. Considering your entire original
post is quoted here, it must be pretty well hidden, because I still can't
see it.

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
 
Reply With Quote
 
brucie
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003
In post <(E-Mail Removed)>
Richard said...

> Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
> validate, due to name not being an attribute,


'name' is a valid attribute of <img> using either the strict or loose
dtd.



--
brucie.
09/October/2003 03:00:47 pm
 
Reply With Quote
 
brucie
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003
In post <(E-Mail Removed)>
brucie said...

>> Using transitional 4.0, if <img src="foo.jpg" name="test"> does not
>> validate, due to name not being an attribute,


> 'name' is a valid attribute of <img> using either the strict or loose
> dtd.


i just noticed the 4.0. use 4.01

--
brucie.
09/October/2003 03:03:38 pm
 
Reply With Quote
 
Hywel Jenkins
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2003
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, anom@anom says...
> rf wrote:


You really are a prime knob, aren't you? You display of sarcasm is
really quite funny when you consder how bloody useless you appear to be
at both web development and taking advice.

--
Hywel I do not eat quiche
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Displaying a Validation Error in a Validation Summary Control Lucas Tam ASP .Net 2 02-26-2004 07:49 PM
ASP.NET Web Forms Validation Controls are Server-Side or Client-Side Validation? Matt ASP .Net 14 01-30-2004 09:15 AM
Web form validation vs object validation Colin Basterfield ASP .Net 1 11-29-2003 12:10 AM
validation summary doesnt display when there's client-side validation Libs ASP .Net 0 06-25-2003 03:05 PM
Re: only custom validation control does server side validation? Colin Mackay ASP .Net 0 06-25-2003 07:54 AM



Advertisments