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

HTML Validator Extension

Expand Messages
  • Ray Shapp
    Hi All, Please pardon me for jumping into an ongoing thread. In the existing thread with subject line, [NH] Validator... , Axel wrote:
    Message 1 of 28 , May 11, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi All,

      Please pardon me for jumping into an ongoing thread.

      In the existing thread with subject line, "[NH] Validator...", Axel wrote:
      << What I do recommend is the Html Validator extension for Firefox. It gives
      you both the W3C Validator errors and Html Tidy warnings and hints and lets
      you view the source with the relevant part highlighted -- a big help. >>

      As recommended, I went to http://validator.w3.org/ but didn't see on the home
      page or in the FAQ any downloadable validator extensions for Firefox or MSIE.
      I also checked the Add-in tool within Firefox and did find four validators,
      but they appear to be written either by some private individuals or are part
      of some larger commercial suite. Please tell me how to download the HTML
      validator for Firefox from the W3C site. Tell me also whether a similar add-in
      or browser helper object is available for MSIE v7.0.

      Thank you.

      Ray Shapp
    • Axel Berger
      ... Yes sorry, I might have been clearer. It is one of those four. It s not by the W3C as such, but it uses the W3C engine internally and thus gives identical
      Message 2 of 28 , May 11, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Ray Shapp wrote:
        > I also checked the Add-in tool within Firefox and did find four
        > validators, but they appear to be written either by some private
        > individuals

        Yes sorry, I might have been clearer. It is one of those four. It's
        not by the W3C as such, but it uses the W3C engine internally and
        thus gives identical results. (I have not looked into it, but I
        presume all W3C stuff is open source anyway.
        Of the four validators (n.b. I just checked and found fourteen) only
        one, the one by Marc Gueury is called "Html Validator". I can't say
        anything, either for or against, about any of the others, but I
        found this one just right for me.

        Axel
      • Cary Driscoll
        This is the add-on Axel was speaking of: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/249 The W3C doesn t make a validator add-on. ... From: Ray Shapp
        Message 3 of 28 , May 11, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          This is the add-on Axel was speaking of:
          https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/249

          The W3C doesn't make a validator add-on.


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Ray Shapp"
          Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 2:26 PM
          Subject: [NH] HTML Validator Extension


          > In the existing thread with subject line, "[NH] Validator...", Axel wrote:
          > << What I do recommend is the Html Validator extension for Firefox... >>
        • loro
          Ray, ... Yes, for the other, but not lesser, validator. If you want to use the w3c validator you could for
          Message 4 of 28 , May 11, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Ray,
            >Tell me also whether a similar add-in
            >or browser helper object is available for MSIE v7.0.

            Yes, for the other, but not lesser, validator.
            <http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/widgets/#valid>

            If you want to use the w3c validator you could for instance install the

            Web Accessibility Toolbar.

            <http://www.visionaustralia.org.au/info.aspx?page=614>
            There are bookmarklets too, for example here.
            <http://tantek.com/favelets/>

            Lotta
          • buralex@gmail.com
            Ray Shapp said on May 11, 2008 17:26 -0400 (in ... Hi Ray: In Firefox 2.x I use http://chrispederick.com/work/web-developer/ extension
            Message 5 of 28 , May 11, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Ray Shapp <ras45@...> said on May 11, 2008 17:26 -0400 (in
              part):
              > In the existing thread with subject line, "[NH] Validator...", Axel wrote:
              > << What I do recommend is the Html Validator extension for Firefox. It
              > gives
              > you both the W3C Validator errors and Html Tidy warnings and hints and
              > lets
              > you view the source with the relevant part highlighted -- a big help. >>
              >
              > As recommended, I went to http://validator.w3.org/ but didn't see on
              > the home
              > page or in the FAQ any downloadable validator extensions for Firefox
              > or MSIE.
              > I also checked the Add-in tool within Firefox and did find four
              > validators,
              > but they appear to be written either by some private individuals or
              > are part
              > of some larger commercial suite. Please tell me how to download the HTML
              > validator for Firefox from the W3C site. Tell me also whether a
              > similar add-in
              > or browser helper object is available for MSIE v7.0.
              Hi Ray:
              In Firefox 2.x I use http://chrispederick.com/work/web-developer/
              extension which adds a toolbar. Amongst all sorts of other goodies it
              adds access to HTML, CSS, Accessibility and JavaScript verification. It
              has three info buttons at right side which indicate no-errors/errors wrt
              to HTML/CSS/JavaScript. Site claims it works with Firefox 3 though I
              haven't used it with that yet. It also has View Source access to
              reconfigured editors. I have mine setup for NVu and Notetab.

              Somewhat related: Validation can't be done on a file existing only on
              local system accessed through file:// protocol. I suspect but haven't
              yet verified that I can get around this by installing Apache.

              =================
              Offtopic: If anyone has any tips for running Apache as just a local
              server I'd appreciate the help.
              FWIW: I've set in C:\Program Files\Apache Software
              Foundation\Apache2.2\conf\httpd.conf:
              ServerName MYDESKTOP.localhost:80

              I first set:
              <Directory "C:\apacheSites"> and put a file at
              "C:\apacheSites\testing.html" at and tried to display it in browser
              as: http://localhost/testing.html
              this resulted in 404 - Not Found and this message in C:\Program
              Files\Apache Software Foundation\Apache2.2\logs\access.log
              127.0.0.1 - - [11/May/2008:19:57:10 -0400] "GET
              /apacheSites/testing.html HTTP/1.1" 404 222

              looking more closely at httpd.conf comments it looks like it s/b:
              <Directory "C:\apacheSites\htdocs"> and the file s/b
              "C:\apacheSites\htdocs\testing.html"
              now I'm getting 403 - Forbidden You don't have permission to access
              /testing.html on this server
              and no lines added to access.log.
              However trying "http://localhost/nosuchfile.html" (ie something that
              doesn't exist) also gives a 403 - Forbidden

              so it looks like Apache at least is getting involved when I try to use
              http://localhost/ but something is still wrong.
              I'll keep digging around in FAQ's etc but thought where I've got to so
              far might ring a bell with those of you who actually run web-sites?

              Regards ... Alec -- buralex-gmail
              --



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • sisterscape
              I have used XAMPP (both in Windoze and now Linux) to run a development server. It has an auto installer that sets everything up. Be aware though that it is
              Message 6 of 28 , May 11, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                I have used XAMPP (both in Windoze and now Linux) to run a development
                server. It has an auto installer that sets everything up. Be aware
                though that it is not a WORKING server. I only use it when I am
                off-line because of security issues. It installs on the C drive (or
                /opt) NOT program files which might be part of your problem.

                I have never had a problem validating files in the XAMPP folders via
                W3C even when the server wasn't running.


                --- buralex@... wrote:
                >
                > Offtopic: If anyone has any tips for running Apache as just a local
                > server I'd appreciate the help.
                > FWIW: I've set in C:\Program Files\Apache Software
                > Foundation\Apache2.2\conf\httpd.conf:
                > ServerName MYDESKTOP.localhost:80
                >
                > I first set:
                > <Directory "C:\apacheSites"> and put a file at
                > "C:\apacheSites\testing.html" at and tried to display it in browser
                >
                > as: http://localhost/testing.html
                > this resulted in 404 - Not Found and this message in C:\Program
                > Files\Apache Software Foundation\Apache2.2\logs\access.log
                > 127.0.0.1 - - [11/May/2008:19:57:10 -0400] "GET
                > /apacheSites/testing.html HTTP/1.1" 404 222
                >
                > looking more closely at httpd.conf comments it looks like it s/b:
                > <Directory "C:\apacheSites\htdocs"> and the file s/b
                > "C:\apacheSites\htdocs\testing.html"
                > now I'm getting 403 - Forbidden You don't have permission to access
                > /testing.html on this server
                > and no lines added to access.log.
                > However trying "http://localhost/nosuchfile.html" (ie something that
                > doesn't exist) also gives a 403 - Forbidden
                >
                > so it looks like Apache at least is getting involved when I try to
                > use
                > http://localhost/ but something is still wrong.
                > I'll keep digging around in FAQ's etc but thought where I've got to
                > so
                > far might ring a bell with those of you who actually run web-sites?
                >
                > Regards ... Alec -- buralex-gmail
                > --
                >
                >
                >


                ____________________________________________________________________________________
                Be a better friend, newshound, and
                know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
              • Ray Shapp
                Hi Axel, Cary, Lotta, Alec: Thanks for your replies. The HTML Validator Add-on for Firefox by Marc Gueury appears to come in three flavors, HTML Tidy , SGML
                Message 7 of 28 , May 11, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Axel, Cary, Lotta, Alec:

                  Thanks for your replies.

                  The HTML Validator Add-on for Firefox by Marc Gueury appears to come in three
                  flavors, "HTML Tidy", "SGML Parser", and "Serial". I chose "HTML Tidy"
                  although that choice is advertised as NOT yielding the "Same errors than the
                  validator.w3.org". I chose that option because it is the only one that offers
                  "Good help". I'm confused about this though because a user can select any one
                  of the three validator algorithms in the Options panel. The download did say
                  that SGML is included with HTML Tidy, but the options panel also offers
                  "Serial" validation. Am I misinterpreting what the options panel is saying?

                  This is a minor issue because I'll probably stay with HTML Tidy only.

                  Thanks again.

                  Ray Shapp
                • Cary Driscoll
                  I have it set to Serial so it does the real validation first. If you understand the W3C s validation results, then the information if gives is more than
                  Message 8 of 28 , May 11, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I have it set to Serial so it does the real validation first. If you
                    understand the W3C's validation results, then the information if gives is
                    more than enough. If there aren't any errors with the real SGML validation,
                    then it will run Tidy which points out things which aren't necessarily
                    errors such as empty div or span tags which may be intentional.

                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Ray Shapp"
                    Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 6:58 PM
                    Subject: Re: [NH] HTML Validator Extension


                    > The HTML Validator Add-on for Firefox by Marc Gueury appears to come in
                    three
                    > flavors, "HTML Tidy", "SGML Parser", and "Serial". I chose "HTML Tidy"
                    > although that choice is advertised as NOT yielding the "Same errors than
                    the
                    > validator.w3.org". I chose that option because it is the only one that
                    offers
                    > "Good help". I'm confused about this though because a user can select any
                    one
                    > of the three validator algorithms in the Options panel. The download did
                    say
                    > that SGML is included with HTML Tidy, but the options panel also offers
                    > "Serial" validation. Am I misinterpreting what the options panel is
                    saying?
                  • Axel Berger
                    ... I have it installed but rarely use it. For one thing the toolbar is wider than my window and does not fold, so half of it resides inaccessibly in thin air
                    Message 9 of 28 , May 12, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      buralex@... wrote:
                      > In Firefox 2.x I use http://chrispederick.com/work/web-developer/
                      > extension which adds a toolbar. Amongst all sorts of other
                      > goodies it adds access to HTML, CSS, Accessibility and
                      > JavaScript verification.

                      I have it installed but rarely use it. For one thing the toolbar is
                      wider than my window and does not fold, so half of it resides
                      inaccessibly in thin air to the right of the monitor. The thing
                      about "Html Validator" is that you need no extra clicks or
                      keystrokes and no extra web accesses, it just sits there and
                      displays the number of errors for every page currently showing. And
                      as long as that is zero for all of mine and something bigger for all
                      the others I continue feeling smug and comfortable.

                      Axel
                    • Axel Berger
                      ... Possibly. I ve set it to serial. That way it runs the W3C algorithm first and displays all true errors. After that it runs Tidy and displays its warnings.
                      Message 10 of 28 , May 12, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ray Shapp wrote:
                        > Am I misinterpreting what the options panel is saying?

                        Possibly. I've set it to serial. That way it runs the W3C algorithm
                        first and displays all true errors. After that it runs Tidy and
                        displays its warnings. These I tend to ignore, because although not
                        quite clean, they're usually there on pupose.
                        It's things like an empty <P></P> which due to margin and padding
                        gives me just the space I want without blowing up my stylesheets
                        further with one more special case definition.

                        > I'll probably stay with HTML Tidy only.

                        I on the other hand could easily do without but need the true
                        validation.

                        Axel
                      • Bob Gorman
                        Friends, Just today I saw some strange characters when I upload a web page to my website. If I select View in Browser from NoteTab5, it displays OK. The
                        Message 11 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Friends,
                          Just today I saw some strange characters when I upload a web page to my
                          website.
                          If I select View in Browser from NoteTab5, it displays OK.
                          The characters are superscript 1 and 2 and are in the same font as the
                          rest of my page, namely ComicSans.
                          But after I upload it to my ISP I get these funny looking characters.
                          It looks like
                          FF
                          FD
                          with a box around it.
                          Sound like something to do with font's but what?
                          If you want to see it, it's at:
                          http://www.kncell.org/ILP.html
                          at the bottom of the 1st table.
                          Thanks

                          Bob

                          --
                          'I am only one; but I am still one.
                          I cannot do everything, but still I can do something.
                          I will not refuse to do the something I can do.'
                          -- Helen Keller


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Axel Berger
                          ... Simple. you don t ever bother to declare a character set and use illegal characters. After telling it to ignore the declaration (by the server) of UTF-8
                          Message 12 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Bob Gorman wrote:
                            > Sound like something to do with font's but what?

                            Simple. you don't ever bother to declare a character set and use illegal
                            characters.

                            After telling it to ignore the declaration (by the server) of UTF-8 and
                            to use cp-1252 (an easy guess, it is always Windows adherents, who
                            believe their way is the only way) your page still contains 20 errors.

                            First write at least semantically correct code that at least validates.
                            If there are problems left then, do go ahead and ask. Doctoring around
                            in pages without correcting the mistakes first is a fool's errand.

                            See:
                            http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.kncell.org%2FILP.html&charset=windows-1252&doctype=Inline&group=0&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.591

                            Axel
                          • loro
                            ... I don t get anything fancy like that. Just question marks. :-( Character encoding mismatch. You declare UTF-8 on the server but I guess you wrote the page
                            Message 13 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Bob Gorman wrote:
                              >Just today I saw some strange characters when I upload a web page to my
                              >website.
                              >If I select View in Browser from NoteTab5, it displays OK.
                              >The characters are superscript 1 and 2 and are in the same font as the
                              >rest of my page, namely ComicSans.
                              >But after I upload it to my ISP I get these funny looking characters.
                              >It looks like
                              >FF
                              >FD
                              >with a box around it.
                              >Sound like something to do with font's but what?
                              >If you want to see it, it's at:
                              >http://www.kncell.org/ILP.html
                              >at the bottom of the 1st table.

                              I don't get anything fancy like that. Just question marks. :-(

                              Character encoding mismatch. You declare UTF-8 on the server but I
                              guess you wrote the page in Notetab, which means ANSI. Characters
                              other than the basic ASCII ones are encoded differently in UTF-8 and
                              ANSI/iso latin, so browsers throw a fit. Use ¹ and ² if you
                              want to declare UTF-8 on the server and all should be well. Or change
                              to iso latin on the server if you want to type the superscript characters.

                              Lotta
                            • loro
                              Hold your horses, Axel. No need to be rude, is there? Everyone isn t at the same level at the same time, you know. ... Yes, he does. ... There you see! He
                              Message 14 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hold your horses, Axel. No need to be rude, is there? Everyone isn't
                                at the same level at the same time, you know.

                                Axel Berger wrote:
                                >Simple. you don't ever bother to declare a character set and use illegal
                                >characters.

                                Yes, he does.

                                >After telling it to ignore the declaration (by the server) of UTF-8

                                There you see! He does declare a charset. In what way does he say
                                that UTF-8 should be ignored? How is it even possible to do that?

                                >and
                                >to use cp-1252 (an easy guess, it is always Windows adherents, who
                                >believe their way is the only way) your page still contains 20 errors.

                                Easy maybe, but wrong. Superscript 1 and 2 are not in the illegal range.

                                >First write at least semantically correct code that at least validates.
                                >If there are problems left then, do go ahead and ask.

                                I'm not so sure I would come back for more of this...

                                > Doctoring around
                                >in pages without correcting the mistakes first is a fool's errand.

                                Well, it didn't take me many seconds and I didn't mind at all. :-)

                                Excuses in advance,
                                Lotta
                              • Bob Gorman
                                Lotta & Axel Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. ... How? Where? How do I change it, if that is what I need to do? Is there an explanation about such matters? ...
                                Message 15 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Lotta & Axel Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.

                                  loro wrote:
                                  > I don't get anything fancy like that. Just question marks. :-(
                                  >
                                  > Character encoding mismatch. You declare UTF-8 on the server
                                  How? Where? How do I change it, if that is what I need to do?
                                  Is there an explanation about such matters?

                                  > but I guess you wrote the page in Notetab,
                                  Absolutely!
                                  > which means ANSI. Characters
                                  > other than the basic ASCII ones are encoded differently in UTF-8 and
                                  > ANSI/iso latin, so browsers throw a fit. Use ¹ and ² if you
                                  > want to declare UTF-8 on the server and all should be well.
                                  I did that and it worked well, but I have no clue why.

                                  > Or change to iso latin on the server if you want to type the
                                  superscript characters.
                                  Again, how do I do that?
                                  Something in the Head part of my html files?
                                  > Lotta

                                  Axel,
                                  I'll reply separately...

                                  Bob

                                  --
                                  If at first, you don't succeed; Parachuting is probably not for you!
                                  http://www.KnCell.org
                                  http://blog.KnCell.org
                                  For sale: Parachute. Only used once, never opened, small stain...


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • Axel Berger
                                  ... Yes, that too. First you need to shut up that server. You might need help from your provider, but this line in .htaccess ought to be the first step:
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Bob Gorman wrote:
                                    > Something in the Head part of my html files?

                                    Yes, that too. First you need to shut up that server. You might need
                                    help from your provider, but this line in .htaccess ought to be the
                                    first step:

                                    AddDefaultCharset Off

                                    See: http://wsabstract.com/howto/htaccess.shtml

                                    You might even be able to make it declare the correct set, but few
                                    providers offer that.


                                    Then your header should contain the line:

                                    <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">

                                    or

                                    <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type"
                                    CONTENT="text/html; charset=windows-1252">

                                    And last you should use Firefox and the "Html Validator" extension for
                                    testing, the easiest and quickes way for flagging all those syntax
                                    errors that will creep in, however diligent you try to be.

                                    Axel
                                  • Axel Berger
                                    ... In away yes, but it is in fact the provider doing for him and doing it wrong for the actual content. ... For UTF-8 the ones Bob uses are. Axel
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      loro wrote:
                                      > There you see! He does declare a charset.

                                      In away yes, but it is in fact the provider doing for him and doing it
                                      wrong for the actual content.

                                      > Easy maybe, but wrong. Superscript 1 and 2 are not in the illegal range.

                                      For UTF-8 the ones Bob uses are.

                                      Axel
                                    • Bob Gorman
                                      Axel Berger wrote: Thank you, but you raise other issues that concern me... ... How? Where did I do that, or fail to do that? ... I share your contempt for
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Axel Berger wrote:

                                        Thank you, but you raise other issues that concern me...

                                        > Simple. you don't ever bother to declare a character set and use illegal
                                        > characters.
                                        How? Where did I do that, or fail to do that?

                                        > After telling it to ignore the declaration (by the server) of UTF-8 and
                                        > to use cp-1252 (an easy guess, it is always Windows adherents, who
                                        > believe their way is the only way) your page still contains 20 errors.

                                        I share your contempt for Windows. But How do I fix it?

                                        > First write at least semantically correct code that at least validates.
                                        > If there are problems left then, do go ahead and ask. Doctoring around
                                        > in pages without correcting the mistakes first is a fool's errand.

                                        Sorry, how do I mend my ways?


                                        > See:
                                        >
                                        http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.kncell.org%2FILP.html&charset=windows-1252&doctype=Inline&group=0&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.591
                                        >
                                        > Axel
                                        I did, and it seems like the 1 warning was more important than the 30
                                        errors.

                                        I did not wake up one morning and declare: I want to screw the Internet!

                                        Most of my code is generated by using the 2 files:
                                        C:\Program Files\NoteTab Pro 5\Libraries\HTML-1.ctb & HTML-2.ctb.

                                        Is this the best available, or do I have some deep seated character flaw
                                        for choosing these files?

                                        Most of the errors seem to have come from using the Table Wizard.
                                        Is it more illusive that the Wizard in "Alice in Wonderland"?

                                        Bob

                                        --
                                        "The difference between fiction and reality?
                                        Fiction has to make sense."
                                        /-- Tom Clancy
                                        /



                                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      • Axel Berger
                                        ... Ignore that, it was a snide remark and not very nice. When the charset is wrong the validator stops right there and tells you no more. So I had to use its
                                        Message 19 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Bob Gorman wrote:
                                          > I share your contempt for Windows. But How do I fix it?

                                          Ignore that, it was a snide remark and not very nice. When the charset
                                          is wrong the validator stops right there and tells you no more. So I had
                                          to use its "try this set instead" option and had to guess which one --
                                          Windows default was the obvious choice.

                                          > Most of the errors seem to have come from using the Table Wizard.
                                          > Is it more illusive that the Wizard in "Alice in Wonderland"?

                                          Possibly, I haven't looked. Unfortunately my best HTML tutorial and
                                          syntax lookup is in German - hopefully the others here can suggest
                                          something for you.
                                          I use my own very heavily edited set of clips, but I believe the default
                                          ones in NoteTab contain a lot of old deprecated and non-standardized
                                          stuff.

                                          Some will say that insisting on valid code is over the top purism, but
                                          when things don't act as you expect them to, finding some elusive hidden
                                          syntax error can take ages. I have found that eliminating all those and
                                          ensuring valid HTML and valid CSS first and then going after my own
                                          faulty logic about how stuff should behave is the fastest and easiest
                                          way to get results.

                                          Your main problem is that the headers sent by the server take precedence
                                          over your own META headers in the code, so you need to make the server
                                          switch those off. The line I quoted is from one of my own .htaccess
                                          files. It ought to work. With that off the META declaration will be used
                                          and that should be what you actually use in your files. For NoteTab and
                                          Windows this is NOT iso 8859-1 by the way, it nearly is but not quite.
                                          You may never actually use the € sign, but why not declare the correct
                                          set anyway?

                                          Purism and fussiness is for lazy people like me, it makes life so much
                                          easier.

                                          Axel
                                        • loro
                                          ... In the only way that matters. ... The host shouldn t send that header at all, but we didn t know it was the host s doing. I still don t. ... That s another
                                          Message 20 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Axel Berger wrote:
                                            >loro wrote:
                                            > > There you see! He does declare a charset.
                                            >
                                            >In away yes,

                                            In the only way that matters.

                                            > but it is in fact the provider doing for him and doing it
                                            >wrong for the actual content.

                                            The host shouldn't send that header at all, but we didn't know it was
                                            the host's doing. I still don't.

                                            > > Easy maybe, but wrong. Superscript 1 and 2 are not in the illegal range.
                                            >
                                            >For UTF-8 the ones Bob uses are.

                                            That's another matter than the illegal windows characters you were
                                            referring to.

                                            Lotta
                                          • Axel Berger
                                            ... Where in Bob s source did you find UTF-8? If not there it must be in the HTML headers. It has to be somewhere. ... No. The browser and the validator first
                                            Message 21 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              loro wrote:
                                              > but we didn't know it was the host's doing. I still don't.

                                              Where in Bob's source did you find UTF-8? If not there it must be in the
                                              HTML headers. It has to be somewhere.

                                              > That's another matter than the illegal windows characters you were
                                              > referring to.

                                              No. The browser and the validator first look what encoding to expect and
                                              then parse the code using that. So what is illegal and what is not
                                              solely depends on that declaration. In another context those very same
                                              characters may be perfectly legal, but that doesn't matter.

                                              Axel
                                            • loro
                                              ... I think you mean HTTP headers. That doesn t mean the host made that happen. ... Superscript 1 and 2, encoded the way they are, are not exclusive to
                                              Message 22 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Axel Berger wrote:
                                                >loro wrote:
                                                > > but we didn't know it was the host's doing. I still don't.
                                                >
                                                >Where in Bob's source did you find UTF-8? If not there it must be in the
                                                >HTML headers. It has to be somewhere.

                                                I think you mean HTTP headers. That doesn't mean the host made that happen.

                                                > > That's another matter than the illegal windows characters you were
                                                > > referring to.
                                                >
                                                >No. The browser and the validator first look what encoding to expect and
                                                >then parse the code using that. So what is illegal and what is not
                                                >solely depends on that declaration. In another context those very same
                                                >characters may be perfectly legal, but that doesn't matter.

                                                Superscript 1 and 2, encoded the way they are, are not exclusive to
                                                cp-1252, and that was what you were talking about. They aren't
                                                "illegal", they just mean different things in ANSI and UTF-8. No
                                                validator refuses to parse Bob's page because of those two
                                                characters. They would have through an error had they been in the so
                                                called illegal range though.

                                                Lotta
                                              • loro
                                                ... This is so backwards. If Bob can use .htaccess, he should of course use it to make the server send the character encoding he prefers, which may very well
                                                Message 23 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Axel Berger wrote:
                                                  >Bob Gorman wrote:
                                                  > > Something in the Head part of my html files?
                                                  >
                                                  >Yes, that too. First you need to shut up that server. You might need
                                                  >help from your provider, but this line in .htaccess ought to be the
                                                  >first step:
                                                  >
                                                  > AddDefaultCharset Off

                                                  This is so backwards. If Bob can use .htaccess, he should of course
                                                  use it to make the server send the character encoding he prefers,
                                                  which may very well be UTF-8 for all we know. Why in the whole world
                                                  not use it as it is intended instead of relying solely on a fallback
                                                  mechanism like Meta?

                                                  ><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">

                                                  Except ASCII doesn't cover superscript 1 and 2, so that's hardly an
                                                  improvement.

                                                  Bob, just use the entities (¹ and ²) for now and be done
                                                  with it. You can read up about character encoding when you feel up to
                                                  it. I fear this will just confuse you and I'm sorry for my part in that.

                                                  Lotta
                                                • Bob Gorman
                                                  ... Yes, I did, & I m happy for now. ... I will. I obviously need to learn about character sets and this mysterious .htaccess, but it can wait till I get a
                                                  Message 24 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    loro wrote:

                                                    > Bob, just use the entities (¹ and ²) for now and be done
                                                    > with it.

                                                    Yes, I did, & I'm happy for now.

                                                    > You can read up about character encoding when you feel up to
                                                    > it.

                                                    I will.
                                                    I obviously need to learn about character sets and this mysterious
                                                    .htaccess, but it can wait till I get a good night's sleep.

                                                    I have 30+ web pages now and plan over time to double that, so I want to
                                                    learn good practices now, to avoid excessive fix-up later.

                                                    Thanks, and good night.

                                                    Bob
                                                  • Axel Berger
                                                    ... Absolutely. It was way past midnight here, when I wrote that. ... Well, someone who has control over the server. And that usually is not the customer or
                                                    Message 25 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      loro wrote:
                                                      > I think you mean HTTP headers.

                                                      Absolutely. It was way past midnight here, when I wrote that.

                                                      > That doesn't mean the host made that happen.

                                                      Well, someone who has control over the server. And that usually is not
                                                      the customer or only to the very limited degree .htaccess allows.

                                                      > Superscript 1 and 2, encoded the way they are, are not exclusive to
                                                      > cp-1252, and that was what you were talking about. They aren't
                                                      > "illegal", they just mean different things in ANSI and UTF-8.

                                                      I have to admit to not being firm in UTF-8. I do know that (nearly?)
                                                      everything that's in the upper 128 for other encodings is a two
                                                      character sequence in UTF-8. And I have tried this: The validator said
                                                      "illegal, no UTF-8" first and was satisfied when I overrode that with
                                                      telling it "use cp-1252". I have not checked which characters were the
                                                      offenders, but the ones that showed up wrong in the browser is a good
                                                      guess IMHO.

                                                      Axel
                                                    • loro
                                                      ... But you suggested Bob would use .htaccess. I d say declaring the charset is one of the most common uses people make of .htaccess. ... You are absolutely
                                                      Message 26 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        Axel Berger wrote:
                                                        > > That doesn't mean the host made that happen.
                                                        >
                                                        >Well, someone who has control over the server. And that usually is not
                                                        >the customer or only to the very limited degree .htaccess allows.

                                                        But you suggested Bob would use .htaccess. I'd say declaring the
                                                        charset is one of the most common uses people make of .htaccess.

                                                        >UTF-8. And I have tried this: The validator said
                                                        >"illegal, no UTF-8" first and was satisfied when I overrode that with
                                                        >telling it "use cp-1252".

                                                        You are absolutely right. The W3C validator does do that now (while
                                                        the WDG one does not). My bad.

                                                        Lotta
                                                      • Axel Berger
                                                        ... We do know, Bob told us. He uses NoteTab and writes in his native Windows charset. Apart from that you re right of course, and I already said so. If Bob
                                                        Message 27 of 28 , Nov 9, 2008
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          loro wrote:
                                                          > This is so backwards. If Bob can use .htaccess, he should of course
                                                          > use it to make the server send the character encoding he prefers,
                                                          > which may very well be UTF-8 for all we know.

                                                          We do know, Bob told us. He uses NoteTab and writes in his native
                                                          Windows charset.
                                                          Apart from that you're right of course, and I already said so.
                                                          If Bob can make the server send the correct HTTP headers, that's best.
                                                          Only his provider can tell him that. The two providers I'm using (one is
                                                          my own choice and with the other I'm webmaster for someone else) don't,
                                                          but at least allow me to stop them sending the wrong ones.

                                                          > Bob, just use the entities (¹ and ²) for now and be done
                                                          > with it.

                                                          That is a possibility. It is the one I use on my own site for maximum
                                                          backwards compatibility and there I declare US-ASCII in step with what
                                                          I'm actually doing.

                                                          For the other site I made easy maintainabilty by others the priority and
                                                          declare cp-1252, meaning that they can just type whatever their Windows
                                                          computer allows them and need not bother about encoding.
                                                          Unless you want to restrict yourself to the lowest common denominator on
                                                          ideological grounds, like I do, that's the best choice. It means in
                                                          essence "whatever you can type and display correctly in NoteTab, the
                                                          server and browser will accept and display correctly too."

                                                          > You can read up about character encoding when you feel up to it.

                                                          Bob, there really is not much to it. Most computers use a 255 character
                                                          alphabet - I'm ignoring extensions like UTF for the moment. In all these
                                                          the first 127 characters are identical and standardized by ASCII. The
                                                          top 128 ones, your ä ö ü é ê € µ and so on, can be all over the place.
                                                          This used to be more of a problem when the Macs, Ataris, Amigas DOS with
                                                          cp-437, DOS with cp-850 and so on all had sizeable market shares. As
                                                          long as you are using Windows and don't switch to cyrillic, greek,
                                                          hebrew or something like that, everything you type and display will be
                                                          encoded as cp-1252 (of which terms like AnsiNew and others are synonyms,
                                                          but not ANSI, Latin-1 or ISO 8859-1). So if you go and tell that to the
                                                          browsers rendering your pages, you'll be fine. If you don't, they or the
                                                          server have to guess and may guess wrong. That's all there is to it.

                                                          Axel
                                                        • loro
                                                          ... Axel, it s only the so called illegal range that s unique to the windows codepage. The rest, as the superscript characters at hand, are not. ... Trial and
                                                          Message 28 of 28 , Nov 10, 2008
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            >We do know, Bob told us. He uses NoteTab and writes in his native
                                                            >Windows charset.

                                                            Axel, it's only the so called illegal range that's unique to the
                                                            windows codepage. The rest, as the superscript characters at hand, are not.

                                                            >If Bob can make the server send the correct HTTP headers, that's best.
                                                            >Only his provider can tell him that.

                                                            Trial and error works pretty well too. ;-)

                                                            >The two providers I'm using (one is
                                                            >my own choice and with the other I'm webmaster for someone else) don't,
                                                            >but at least allow me to stop them sending the wrong ones.

                                                            Do they let you use .htaccess but they don't let you use it to
                                                            declare the character encoding? That sounds strange and unusual indeed.


                                                            >encoded as cp-1252 (of which terms like AnsiNew and others are synonyms,
                                                            >but not ANSI, Latin-1 or ISO 8859-1). So if you go and tell that to the
                                                            >browsers rendering your pages, you'll be fine.

                                                            So he will with an iso latin charset.

                                                            I'll be quiet now. This doesn't lead anywhere and has very little to
                                                            do with Bob's question. Again, I'm sorry for this bickering. It
                                                            really wasn't my intention but that's how it turned out. I just
                                                            wanted Bob to get an answer to his question.

                                                            Lotta
                                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.