Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

JSLint validation page has HTML issues

Expand Messages
  • Fred Lorrain
    Hello, Here again your most devoted fan come with an improvement request :D There some HTML issues on the page http://www.jslint.com/ Very easy to fix, so
    Message 1 of 7 , Aug 19, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello,

      Here again your most devoted fan come with an improvement request :D

      There some HTML issues on the page http://www.jslint.com/

      Very easy to fix, so please let's do it.

      line 1 column 1 - Warning: missing <!DOCTYPE> declaration
      line 2 column 1 - Warning: <style> inserting "type" attribute
      line 148 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute
      line 149 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute

      Thanks
    • Douglas Crockford
      ... No thanks. I think DOCTYPE was a mistake. Certainly, requiring type on script src was a mistake.
      Message 2 of 7 , Aug 20, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Fred Lorrain" <yahoo@...> wrote:
        > There some HTML issues on the page http://www.jslint.com/
        >
        > Very easy to fix, so please let's do it.
        >
        > line 1 column 1 - Warning: missing <!DOCTYPE> declaration
        > line 2 column 1 - Warning: <style> inserting "type" attribute
        > line 148 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute
        > line 149 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute

        No thanks. I think DOCTYPE was a mistake. Certainly, requiring type on
        script src was a mistake.
      • Fred Lorrain
        ... I don t clearly undersand you(English is not my mother tong). Will you fix the issues or I made a mistake in my analysis?
        Message 3 of 7 , Sep 11, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Fred Lorrain" <yahoo@> wrote:
          > > There some HTML issues on the page http://www.jslint.com/
          > >
          > > Very easy to fix, so please let's do it.
          > >
          > > line 1 column 1 - Warning: missing <!DOCTYPE> declaration
          > > line 2 column 1 - Warning: <style> inserting "type" attribute
          > > line 148 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute
          > > line 149 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute
          >
          > No thanks. I think DOCTYPE was a mistake. Certainly, requiring type on
          > script src was a mistake.
          >

          I don't clearly undersand you(English is not my mother tong).
          Will you fix the issues or I made a mistake in my analysis?
        • Douglas Crockford
          ... No.
          Message 4 of 7 , Sep 12, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Fred Lorrain" <yahoo@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Fred Lorrain" <yahoo@> wrote:
            > > > There some HTML issues on the page http://www.jslint.com/
            > > >
            > > > Very easy to fix, so please let's do it.
            > > >
            > > > line 1 column 1 - Warning: missing <!DOCTYPE> declaration
            > > > line 2 column 1 - Warning: <style> inserting "type" attribute
            > > > line 148 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute
            > > > line 149 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute
            > >
            > > No thanks. I think DOCTYPE was a mistake. Certainly, requiring type on
            > > script src was a mistake.
            > >
            >
            > I don't clearly understand you(English is not my mother tong).
            > Will you fix the issues or I made a mistake in my analysis?

            No.
          • Fred Lorrain
            Ok now I understand your answer. You said that type is not mandatory with . It seems that now we should use type= application/javascript and not
            Message 5 of 7 , Oct 22, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Ok now I understand your answer.
              You said that type is not mandatory with <script>.

              It seems that now we should use type="application/javascript"
              and not anymore type="text/javascript"

              http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4329.txt

              So Ok to not add the type property to the <script> but the DOCTYPE is
              still missing.

              --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Fred Lorrain" <yahoo@> wrote:
              > >
              > > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@>
              > > wrote:
              > > >
              > > > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Fred Lorrain" <yahoo@> wrote:
              > > > > There some HTML issues on the page http://www.jslint.com/
              > > > >
              > > > > Very easy to fix, so please let's do it.
              > > > >
              > > > > line 1 column 1 - Warning: missing <!DOCTYPE> declaration
              > > > > line 2 column 1 - Warning: <style> inserting "type" attribute
              > > > > line 148 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute
              > > > > line 149 column 1 - Warning: <script> inserting "type" attribute
              > > >
              > > > No thanks. I think DOCTYPE was a mistake. Certainly, requiring
              type on
              > > > script src was a mistake.
              > > >
              > >
              > > I don't clearly understand you(English is not my mother tong).
              > > Will you fix the issues or I made a mistake in my analysis?
              >
              > No.
              >
            • Douglas Crockford
              ... I do not believe in DOCTYPE. Like much of the W3C stack, it is a well-intentioned blunder.
              Message 6 of 7 , Oct 23, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Fred Lorrain" <yahoo@...> wrote:
                >
                > Ok now I understand your answer.
                > You said that type is not mandatory with <script>.
                >
                > It seems that now we should use type="application/javascript"
                > and not anymore type="text/javascript"
                >
                > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4329.txt
                >
                > So Ok to not add the type property to the <script> but the DOCTYPE is
                > still missing.

                I do not believe in DOCTYPE. Like much of the W3C stack, it is a
                well-intentioned blunder.
              • Fred Lorrain
                ... Application/javascript is not working with IE. I will them continue to use and to recommend type= text/javascript in every About DOCTYPE, all
                Message 7 of 7 , Nov 3, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Fred Lorrain" <yahoo@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Ok now I understand your answer.
                  > > You said that type is not mandatory with <script>.
                  > >
                  > > It seems that now we should use type="application/javascript"
                  > > and not anymore type="text/javascript"
                  > >
                  > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4329.txt
                  > >
                  > > So Ok to not add the type property to the <script> but the DOCTYPE is
                  > > still missing.
                  >
                  > I do not believe in DOCTYPE. Like much of the W3C stack, it is a
                  > well-intentioned blunder.
                  >

                  Application/javascript is not working with IE.
                  I will them continue to use and to recommend type="text/javascript" in
                  every <script>

                  About DOCTYPE, all HTML validators want it. There is a huge impact on
                  your page if you use it or not.
                  I recommend to use the right one on every pages.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.