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

Re: [NH] Warning: expected "html PUBLIC"

Expand Messages
  • Jody
    Hi Grant, ... A joke right? :) The online Validator at w3g won t pass me until I take out my bordercolorlight/dark. OH well, I guess I won t pass on those
    Message 1 of 11 , May 31, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Grant,

      >^!Url www.FontWithDrawalSociety.org

      A joke right? :)

      The online Validator at w3g won't pass me until I take out my
      bordercolorlight/dark. OH well, I guess I won't pass on those
      pages. Bobby likes my pages though and I feel that is a very
      high honor to get. ;) To be honest with you, I think I will just
      take what I have learned and use the browsers as my validators.
      If it looks good in them - I really don't care what w3g and xhtml
      think. I would rather it look good for people than have to be
      chained up by rules and not be able to do things I would like. I
      do appreciate all you have taught me, so don't take the above the
      wrong way. It is way past my bed time and I'm tired and grumpy
      too. -- Sometimes I wake up grumpy in the morning, but I usually
      let her sleep. ;)

      Bye for now,
      Jody Adair
      Prov. 3:5-7; 4:23

      http://www.sureword.com/sojourner
      http://www.sureword.com/kjb1611
      http://www.sureword.com/notetab
    • Red Leader
      ... Amen to that! ... Emmett Hawkins
      Message 2 of 11 , May 31, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Jody wrote:

        > To be honest with you, I think I will just
        > take what I have learned and use the browsers as my validators.
        > If it looks good in them - I really don't care what w3g and xhtml
        > think.

        Amen to that!

        ---
        Emmett Hawkins
      • Ian Ornstein
        Hmmm... As I understand it, correct me if I have it wrong, part of the rational for xhtml is to overcome past abuses in the use of HTML. We are rapidly comming
        Message 3 of 11 , May 31, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          Hmmm...
          As I understand it, correct me if I have it wrong,
          part of the rational for xhtml is to overcome past abuses in the use
          of HTML.

          We are rapidly comming into the development for more portable devices
          like cell phones and Dick Tracy wristwatches. Whereas the big browsers
          could exist as bloatware (11mg downloads) so that they could
          accomodate
          good and bad HTML, the new devices will have their brower on a chip
          and will *only* function with good code.
          This means follow the rules: proper nesting, closing tags etc.
          It seems to me that it is not too soon to get in the habit of passing
          some kind of validation - choose your exceptions and either agree
          with them
          or fix the code.

          Of course all this depends on the expected life of your pages ;-)

          So I do care what xhtml thinks.
          - IanO -
          ps I am as confused as the next developer as to what needs to be
          in the <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0
          Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
          line. I admit that I haven't taken the time to learn about it and
          occasionally it is the cause of my page not working as I expect.
          This discussion is motivating me to find out more about it.
        • Jody
          Hi Ian, As I understand it, correct me if I have it wrong, part of the rational for xhtml is to overcome past abuses in the use of HTML. That is what I
          Message 4 of 11 , May 31, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Ian, > As I understand it, correct me if I have it wrong, part of the > rational for xhtml is to overcome past abuses in the use of > HTML. That is what I understand also. > This means follow the rules: proper nesting, closing tags etc. > It seems to me that it is not too soon to get in the habit of > passing some kind of validation - choose your exceptions and > either agree with them or fix the code. I don't have a problem with proper coding, but I do when they start getting nit picky. WC3 doesn't allow bordercolordark and light, etc. Why not just take out border altogether and all text color and while their at it images too? Not that I care for MS, but they do have some good ideas every now and then. ;) > Of course all this depends on the expected life of your pages ;-) True and how much one is concerned how many devices he can display in. > So I do care what xhtml thinks. Good for you! I hope all the Dick Tracey fans can view your big images on their watch face. I am reall
            y only concerned that the majority of PC's can get some kind of presentable/readable page. > is used on the first line and just says the doc appears to be HTML. I'll probably continue to validate a page a day and maybe just start building Clips as I go to replace tags with the new and eventually get all of them in one Clip that should cover my 5000 or whatever web pages depending on what I felt like doing on each one of them and what program I made them with. Some of my pages pass first time through believe it or not. ;)

            Happy HTML'n!
            Jody

            http://www.sureword.com/notetab

            The NoteTab and Html List...
            mailto:Ntb-html-Subscribe@...
            mailto:Ntb-html-UnSubscribe@...
          • Michael Gerholdt
            Jody, There is a little confusion about the notion of validity which I hope to knock out of that head of yours! When you say that WC3 doesn t allow
            Message 5 of 11 , May 31, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              Jody,

              There is a little confusion about the notion of "validity" which I hope to
              knock out of that head of yours!

              When you say that WC3 "doesn't allow" bordercolor stuff - that's not exactly
              what's happening here. That tag is proprietary and was created by a browser
              vendor. It is not part of the HTML specifications in any version. When an
              SMGL parser comes along to check your HTML code and finds something there
              that isn't part of the specification, then it has no choice but to say that
              "this doesn't qualify as valid HTML ...."

              Now I consider myself rather a purist regarding HTML. I use the validator to
              check my pages. But if I run across something like the above that causes my
              page not to validate, I am not concerned. Why? Because I know that other
              browsers that do not support TOPMARGIN or BORDERCOLOR or the like simply
              ignore the tag. It causes no problems. Therefore I can make an informed
              decision that this page will fail validity because I have chosen to use a
              tag which doesn't exist in the HTML specifications, yet I choose to use it
              because I like how it works in browser X.

              So my pages will not all validate. But I will not have a page which fails
              validation because I write sloppy code in general.

              Validation is a tool to use for your use, not a slavemaster. WC3 does not
              mind if you use TOPMARGIN on your page, or BORDERCOLOR either. They are just
              tags which are, properly speaking, not HTML at all.

              You are not under the law! Yet you might find the law to be useful.

              Bottom line: use validation to write good code. Break specs when you know
              the consequences and take responsibility for them.

              Regards,
              Michael Gerholdt
              SUNY College at Fredonia

              > I don't have a problem with proper coding, but I do when they start
              getting nit picky. WC3 doesn't allow bordercolordark and light, etc. Why not
              just take out border altogether and all text color and while their at it
              images too?
            • Jody
              Hi Michael, ... Thanks - that is the way I was starting to feel - that I was under the law. I guess I wanted w3c to say like my boy would say, Good job Jody
              Message 6 of 11 , May 31, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Michael,

                > You are not under the law! Yet you might find the law to be
                > useful.
                >
                > Bottom line: use validation to write good code. Break specs
                > when you know the consequences and take responsibility for them.

                Thanks - that is the way I was starting to feel - that I was
                under the law.

                I guess I wanted w3c to say like my boy would say, "Good job
                Jody" since everybody else is happy, even Bobby. :)

                I guess I could take it could, save, and hit my upload icon on my
                Clipbar, validate so I get my pat on the back, undo the changes,
                save, and upload. <bg> I could do that faster in NoteTab than
                some people would take to find their ftp program. :)

                Happy HTML'n!
                Jody

                http://www.sureword.com/notetab

                The NoteTab and Html List...
                mailto:Ntb-html-Subscribe@...
                mailto:Ntb-html-UnSubscribe@...
              • Grant
                ... DOCTYPE the type of document in your case is a
                Message 7 of 11 , Jun 1, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  > I took off the last half of the following, because I thought
                  > it was a like to www.w3.org and those are the guys causing me
                  > all these headaches. ;)
                  >
                  >
                  <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
                  "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

                  DOCTYPE the type of document in your case is a PUBLIC document based on the
                  HTML 4.01 Transitional DTD.
                  first quote is the name of the DTD
                  "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
                  the 2nd quote is the url where the DTD can be found.
                  "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"

                  .The DTD (document type definition) defines exactly what elements and
                  attributes can be contained in your document.
                  When you validate a document you validate it against the DTD that the
                  document is linked to.

                  If you set the doctype to system then you can locate the DTD on your
                  harddrive.
                  <!DOCTYPE HTML system "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
                  "C:\dtds\loose.dtd">

                  There is nothing stopping you altering this local DTD and give certain
                  elements attributes like TOPMARGIN, BORDERCOLOR or any other attributes you
                  like so it will comply to a certain propriety browser. If you use these
                  attrributes in your document and defined these attributes in the DTD then
                  your document would VALIDATE. In short validation has got nothing to do with
                  how a browser displays your documents but whether or not it complies to a
                  DTD.

                  IMHO every HTML clipbook library should be based on a DTD.The xhtml library
                  being based on the xhtml strict DTD is an example how this can be done. In
                  fact the library is an attempt to translate a DTD into a clip library.
                  If you want to check it out the xhtml library is available at.
                  www.markup.co.nz/xhtml/libraries/xhtml.zip
                • Grant
                  ... Pro loose.dtd ... If you want to customise the DTD Doctype needs to be set to system not public.
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jun 2, 2000
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//w3c//dtd HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "E:\NoteTab
                    Pro\loose.dtd">
                    >
                    If you want to customise the DTD Doctype needs to be set to system not
                    public.
                    <!DOCTYPE HTML SYSTEM

                    The following article shows how you can validate your document by
                    customising a DTD
                    http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/customdtd.html

                    you also might want to check out the discusion of the difference between
                    lints and validators.
                    http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/differences.html

                    >I tried the following in my .dtd file with and without %Color;
                    >but Tidy still reports it. ???

                    TIDY doesn't lay claim to be a validator and as far I am aware it is not DTD
                    aware. It just checks that your markup is wellformed and that it complies
                    with w3c recomendations.
                    I'm not quite sure whether customising the DTD would work with the cse
                    validator The above article says it is a lint not a real.validator.

                    Just checked the CSE site.....
                    In a reply to a post the CSE author Albert Wiersch said

                    "CSE does not read DTDs.

                    I will look into XHTML more for the next major upgrade. There are some
                    features you can check now to help you:
                    XML Compatibility
                    Require optional closing tags
                    Require lowercase tags and attributes
                    Require quoted attribute values

                    I think checking the above will help. Those options are in the Validator 2
                    tab in the Validator Engine Options. "
                    http://www.htmlvalidator.com/phorum/read.php3?num=4&id=46&loc=1&thread=45&
                  • Jody
                    Hi Grant, ... Ah, maybe that is my problem. ;) ... OH, I must have misunderstood you. I was trying to get Tidy not to check for bordercolor... ... I know. :)
                    Message 9 of 11 , Jun 2, 2000
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Grant,

                      > If you want to customise the DTD Doctype needs to be set to
                      > system not public.
                      > <!DOCTYPE HTML SYSTEM

                      Ah, maybe that is my problem. ;)

                      >> I tried the following in my .dtd file with and without %Color;
                      >> but Tidy still reports it. ???
                      >
                      > TIDY doesn't lay claim to be a validator and as far I am aware
                      > it is not DTD aware.

                      OH, I must have misunderstood you. I was trying to get Tidy not
                      to check for bordercolor...

                      > Just checked the CSE site.....
                      > In a reply to a post the CSE author Albert Wiersch said
                      >
                      > "CSE does not read DTDs.

                      I know. :) Tidy is the one complaining.

                      > I will look into XHTML more for the next major upgrade.

                      OK, but that won't interest me. I won't use all lowercase until
                      forced to. The reason I asked before about using your library
                      and then making it all upper tag, lower attribute was I would
                      get a strict validation, but then change the case and change
                      <!DocType after that.

                      Thanks!
                      Jody

                      Clean-Funnies: click and send...
                      mailto:c-f@...?subject=Subscribe
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.