Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > W3C Validator Icon and W3C Valdiator page

Reply
Thread Tools

W3C Validator Icon and W3C Valdiator page

 
 
Frank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2004
Hi

I have added two validator icons from W3C - "Valid XHTML 1.1!" and "Valid
CSS".
I have copied them from W3C pages and altered them with respect to the
image-files (at least that was the intention

I have two problems with these icons:

1. The images seems not to be retrieved by the browser. The "ALT" text is
visible.
In my directory on the ISP-site I find the files with the name:

valid-css.png
valid-xhtml11.png

The tag conserning these icon are in this paragraph:

<p>
<a href="http://validator.w3.org/check/referer"><img
src="valid-xhtml11.png" alt="Valid XHTML 1.1!" height="31" width="88" /></a>

<a
href="http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http://home.broadpark
..no/~frankjj/">
<img style="border:0;width:88px;height:31px"
src="valid-css.png"
alt="Valid CSS!"/>
</a>
</p>


What is my problem?

2. When I click the "Valid XHTML 1.1!" icon I arrive to the MarkUp
Validation Service page
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=

I have experienced that some other pages on the internet have same problem.
Is this the correct behavior?
To me it looks like an error. The yellow field starts saying "Sorry, this
type of URI....."

What is my problem?
--

I anyone feel like looking at the pages themselves they are found at:
http://home.broadpark.no/~frankjj

Thank you for any tip,
Frank


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Dorward
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2004
Frank wrote:

> 1. The images seems not to be retrieved by the browser. The "ALT" text is
> visible.
> In my directory on the ISP-site I find the files with the name:


> What is my problem?


Hard to say - try providing a URI.

> 2. When I click the "Valid XHTML 1.1!" icon I arrive to the MarkUp
> Validation Service page
> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=


Most likely you are not sending a referer header (which the validator
depends upon when you visit /check/referer).

--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Blinky the Shark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2004
David Dorward wrote:

> Frank wrote:


>> 1. The images seems not to be retrieved by the browser. The "ALT" text is
>> visible.
>> In my directory on the ISP-site I find the files with the name:


>> What is my problem?


> Hard to say - try providing a URI.


"I anyone feel like looking at the pages themselves they are found at:
http://home.broadpark.no/~frankjj"

--
Blinky Linux Registered User 4892F
AOL Diary http://snipurl.com/aoldiary
Nigerian Scam From Space http://snipurl.com/iss419
New Windows - Don't Wait For Longhorn! http://snipurl.com/newwin
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Håsäther
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2004
Frank <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I have added two validator icons from W3C - "Valid XHTML 1.1!" and
> "Valid CSS".


Why? And why XHTML 1.1?

> I have two problems with these icons:
>
> 1. The images seems not to be retrieved by the browser. The "ALT"
> text is visible.


[...]

> What is my problem?


The images seems to be broken.

> 2. When I click the "Valid XHTML 1.1!" icon I arrive to the MarkUp
> Validation Service page
> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=


[...]

> The yellow field starts saying "Sorry, this
> type of URI....."


Are you sure you didn't try to validate a local file? The link works
good for me (i.e., I end up at <http://validator.w3.org/check?
uri=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.broadpark.no%2F~frankjj%2F>)

--
David Håsäther
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Dorward
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2004
Blinky the Shark wrote:
> "I anyone feel like looking at the pages themselves they are found at:
> http://home.broadpark.no/~frankjj"


libpng error: PNG file corrupted by ASCII conversion

Looks like someone uploaded them via ftp in ASCII mode.

--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2004
> Looks like someone uploaded them via ftp in ASCII mode.
>

Hi!
Thanks - this was the problem - they works.

Frank


 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2004
>
> Why? And why XHTML 1.1?
>

Hi!

Because I thought it was "A Good Thing" to do. Do you have some good
arguments not to do it?
Then please tell me. W3C says
http://www.earth.com/bad-style/why-validate.html
this goes for more important things than my home-page of course, but I also
do it in order to learn from this.

Thanks,
Frank


 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2004
>
> Are you sure you didn't try to validate a local file? The link works
> good for me (i.e., I end up at <http://validator.w3.org/check?
> uri=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.broadpark.no%2F~frankjj%2F>)


Hi!

I need to investigate more on this...
Using the link you send me here then it works for me also, but from the page
itself it didn't.
I understand it as if it worked for you - I will ask someone I know to try
it...
Im sure that didn't upload a local file: The tags are as in the OP - I don't
see that any local file could be my problem(?)

Thank you for response,
Frank


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark Parnell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2004
On Mon, 3 May 2004 07:45:24 +0200, "Frank" <(E-Mail Removed)> declared
in alt.html:

> Using the link you send me here then it works for me also, but from the page
> itself it didn't.


That's because you are trying to use the Referer: header to tell the
validator the location of the page. Your browser or your ISP (or
possibly something else) doesn't send the Referer: header, so the
validator has no URI to validate.

Better to link using the page address, e.g. the one that David gave you
(please quote the name of who you are replying to, BTW).

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Dorward
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2004
Frank wrote:
>> Why? why XHTML 1.1?


> Because I thought it was "A Good Thing" to do. Do you have some good
> arguments not to do it?


Validation is a good thing to do, I think that David was referring to the
use of the icons and of XHTML 1.1.

On icons:
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/...tion.html#icon

On XHTML:
The specification says you SHOULD NOT send XHTML 1.1 as text/html, if you
send it using its good content type (application/xhtml+xml) then some
browsers (such as lynx, links, w3m, oh and all known versions of Microsoft
Internet Explorer) will prompt the user to download it rather then
rendering it.

As for XHTML 1.0, it can cause problems unless you understand some subtle
but significant differences between it and HTML.

http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml

Then we have the empty element problem, described here:
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/empty.html
and visible here:
http://dorward.me.uk/tmp/gt.png
(Emacs, the large window, is treating the document as HTML and correctly
rendering a > character after each image[1]. Lynx (the small black window)
is also treating it as HTML, but is incorrectly not rendering the >
characters.)

[1] They are both text browsers so we get alt text rather then images.


--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
 
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
[ANN] Beta test of the W3C Markup Validator (0.7.0 beta 1) David Dorward HTML 0 07-12-2005 09:27 PM
Problem with w3c validator in script definition of doPostBack Alfonso Alvarez ASP .Net 2 05-13-2004 07:47 AM
A new beta of the W3C Validator has been released. David Dorward HTML 0 04-16-2004 06:21 AM
Newbie : Charset with W3C HTML validator Paul Blay HTML 6 12-09-2003 08:22 PM
W3C Validator xeno HTML 1 06-28-2003 01:30 AM



Advertisments