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

Re: JSLint validation page has HTML issues

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 7 , Sep 11 11:56 PM
    • 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 2 of 7 , Sep 12 6:08 AM
      • 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 3 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 4 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 5 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.