W3C Standard..."Is it actually valid"?

[Nomad]

I ask because last night I decided to test the new build of my community site, Trybalink.net.

I got am invalidation which included an extra comma in one of my meta tags (Though it did not question me not useing 'Quote' attributes to all the meta tags).
The main code questioned was all of my frame code. I questioned this on another forum I use as I had written this code in notepad directly from a good HTML 4.0 book. It questioned all the attributes wether I used 'Quotes' or not.

I then set up a test folder and a test page. the test page only contained header information and the background body tags, plus closing tags </body></html>.

The page passed validation and I was then redirected to another page where on offer should I wish to use it was some code linking to the W3C site and an icon validating the page's HTML code.
I think exellent and copy the code exactly and place in the page with the addition of the 'center' tags for asthetics.

I then re-tested the page via there 'referer' link. The result was an invalid HTML Code page by there own code!

It seems that (according to there vaidator) the closing bracket ' > ' in the most basic of paremeter code (</p>) is wrong. It questioned the use of the final closing bracket on that paremeter.
As this is a standard code function and accepted since probably the birth of HTML (the use of enclosing brackets < >) How can we trust there validation process if they can't even validate the most basic of paremeter codes?

The page I used for the initial test (The page that passed) is here http://www.trybalink.net/newtest/index.htm

The page with there code added that failed the re-test is here http://www.trybalink.net/newtest/index2.htm

I gave W3C a chance to respond to an e-mail I sent reguarding this but as yet have not reciebed any reply.

My question is then is 'Just how valid is W3C standards?' and if they can't even validate the most simple of basic html paremeters that has been a basic required standard since the beginning of html 'Just what do we do?'.

~ :)

[disciple]

Are you using a dtd?

Secondly your links are no good so there is no way to view what you actually did or didn't do.

[Nomad]

My Apoligies Links fixed- Forgot I took the underscore out on the server folder.


how do you mean using a dtd? how would that affect the use of a basic simple paremeter? the page (whith there code) should still validate with the codes encesed in there respective brackets (<>). This go's without exception as far as I am aware in all HTML. So having a dtd is of little or no consequence.
This a refusal by the W3C validation center to validate even the most basic of code i.e. the closing paremeter bracket, thus ' > '.

the pages are now working and you are welcome to view the code witch passed (Result)

and the result After there code was added Result 2

It is clear from those two examples and from the use of the most very basic of code, that W3C are not living up to even there own exacting standards and as such again I have to ask 'Where does that leave us as designers? and after spending many disheartening hrs trying to validate pages and being left in nothing but frustration, Are they taking the micheal as they say? because if they are I for one am going to be Royally ****** off!!

And I would hazard a guess, that I wouldn't be the only one left with that feeling..


~ :)

[greeneagle]

Nomad,
We have been discussing related topics in this thread pretty heavily:

http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=12470

FYI

Ken

[Nomad]

Originally Posted by greeneagle

Nomad,
We have been discussing related topics in this thread pretty heavily:

http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=12470

FYI

Ken

yes I recieved a link on that today in my e-mail. I felt though, that even though it is related in some ways that as I am calling there so-called standards into question that it meritted a new subject. Maybe if admin feel different they may want to merge this topic with the other..

~ :)

[disciple]

Very odd indeed. I have no explanation!

[Nomad]

Originally Posted by disciple

Very odd indeed. I have no explanation!

it completly throw me. I imagined all smiles every thing fine (On the secong test-with there code).

I would have expected, obviously, that the page would again show as validated and thought I had copy/pasted wrong. I went back to the validated page and wrote the code in via notepad. (bit of awkward positioning of open documents but managed it). result was an invalidated page.

basically what there saying invalidates virtually every single web-page (And I can bet that would cover most 80%+ at a guess or most of the entire World Wide Web!) is invalid at the most basic html code level!

I mean how absolutley ludicrous! If your going to set a standard I would assume that most basic code is reconised as valid other wise what is the point to it and where does it place us when one thinks of the many long months/hours learning all this?
Only to find that no matter what we do our web-pages/webs will be invalad at there most basic level.

I would expect this at the other end of the scale with the use of Data-Bases and MYSQL/PHP etc but with this...Well I don't care..I'll test the page/site in all browsers as that is a must, get friends to test for me in differing larger monitor sizes/resolutions and be done with.

I give up, I'm really quite annoyed about it I think as I have put those hours in, trusted there standards only to find this.

~ :)

[mikmik]

So, if you read the explanation, thaterror can be attributed to "SOMETHING THAT IS MISSING"

I have had more than my share of these bloody things, and my page looks perfect, and everything.

But I saw what caused this one right off, and it is not a mistake I have ever made before, so I wasn't going on previous experience when I caught this.

Every time that I failed because of that EXACT error, I have found something missing.

[mikmik]

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...00=1&verbose=1

http://www.alpineinternet.com/.docs/...om&Submit=+Ok+


I tried about four different validators, and they all said the same thing - exactly!
http://developers.evrsoft.com/direct...ors_and_Lints/

[JayDrake]

Nomad,

First, as is often the case with these sorts of errors, your </p> tag is not the trouble. In fact, the trouble is the use of a <center> tag which was deprecated in html 4.x. Replace the <center> tag with a <div> that aligns the text to middle and everything is good. It can be noted that the W3C does not put the <center> tag in their code to show the validation icon. A simple enough mistake that's hard to track down. :)

I'm personally just glad to see more people validating their code. :)

[Webnauts]

Nomad you have the following errors which you must correct on the page http://www.trybalink.net/newtest/index2.htm can validate:

1. Lines 13,14,15,16,17: These lines contain part of a quoted string that spans more than one line (not recommended) or a quoted string (like an attribute value) that is missing the start or end quotation mark. You should check this line for improperly quoted attribute values that may be missing a start or end quotation mark. Note that because of inconsistent handling by user agents, it is not recommended that attribute values contain line breaks.

Line 22: The "center" tag is contained in a "p" tag that was opened in line 22. This is against the HTML specification and may cause problems with some browsers.

Fixing these issues, your page will validate!

By the way congradulations for the accessibility of your page. It meets the W3C/WAI Double-A!

Though, if you replace your <HTML> tag with <HTML lang="en">, your page will meet the W3C/WAI Triple-A. And that will be excellent! GOOD WORK!!!

By the way I have build a page with diverse validators. Worth to have a look!

If you have any further questions, or you need any further help, just post!

[Nomad]

My adding the '<center>' attributes shouldn't make any difference really.
Those tags have been part of the basic raw html code for centering an object/text within the 'P' paremeters as far as I am aware, since HTML started, though I am open to correction on that.

In that case it still calls into question as to how the 'closing bracket' paremter at the end of the html string can be classed as invalid.

I mean that is totally stupid. It is the most important part of the code, if I was asked because how does a 'browser' know when the code ends? (and obviously where the next begins)
Sorry I know that I have valid html with there code and even though I added the 'center' attribute, that wasn't questioned.

Use of .dtd would be for using Frames I believe but is not really applicable in this case.

Either there validation engine is not working or some thing is amiss in my (all be it novice) opinion.

I mean what your saying is that the simple addition by me of 'center' tags' invalidates the final 'closing bracket of the html string'? which happens to be there code for there link?

Sorry that just does not make sence to me...The string won't even function correctly without it!

I would like my sites to have a certain standard. I don't believe there is any point in doing this unless it is done correctly, One of the sites I currently web-master is going to be quite an important Health Related site for Mainly Asthma sufferers but beneficial to all, especially Athletes!

So I have to get this right, no option but if the World reconised Organisation invalidates the most simplest of basic essential paremters, (Remember it did not question my use of the 'center' attributes), I don't think I have a chance to get my frames validated no matter what I do... I mean to me it's just stupid.

~ :)

[JayDrake]

Originally Posted by Nomad

My adding the '<center>' attributes shouldn't make any difference really.
Those tags have been part of the basic raw html code for centering an object/text within the 'P' paremeters as far as I am aware, since HTML started, though I am open to correction on that.

No. So long as you are validating against html 4 specs, using the center tag is wrong. Yes, center has been a part of html since html 1.0, but was deprecated in html 4.0, this makes the code invalid based on the specification that you are using html 4.0 at the top of your document. (The [b], [i] and other tags would also fall in there.)

Originally Posted by Nomad

In that case it still calls into question as to how the 'closing bracket' paremter at the end of the html string can be classed as invalid.

It is one of those quirks of error correction/validation that is somewhat universal. The validator makes it's best guess as to where it's broken which often means it is looking in the wrong spot. In this case I find it somewhat more odd than usual, but it's not uncommon for an error to point you in the wrong direction.

Originally Posted by Nomad

Use of .dtd would be for using Frames I believe but is not really applicable in this case.

Again, no. Specifying html 4 is why it didn't work. If you specified an earlier version of html it would validate just fine as center was not deprecated prior to html 4. You are simply not following the rules of the specification you chose.

Originally Posted by Nomad

I mean what your saying is that the simple addition by me of 'center' tags' invalidates the final 'closing bracket of the html string'? which happens to be there code for there link?

The center tag confuses the validator which produces the error. The validator then presents a guess as to what produced it's error. I find it unusual that the validator cannot recognize that error for exactly what it is, but sometimes that is how it goes.

Originally Posted by Nomad

I would like my sites to have a certain standard. I don't believe there is any point in doing this unless it is done correctly...

I agree. There is no point in choosing a standard unless you follow that standard. The center tag is not within the standard you have chosen.

Originally Posted by Nomad

...if the World reconised Organisation invalidates the most simplest of basic essential paremters, (Remember it did not question my use of the 'center' attributes)

Again, dump the center tag and it will not show you that same error. Validator errors are not absolute. They are starting points to find the problem. Experience both with the validator and your chosen spec will help you find where the actual problem is faster. I took 5 minutes to find that.

Originally Posted by Nomad

I don't think I have a chance to get my frames validated no matter what I do

Perhaps you have chosen the wrong specification to use. I would recommend either the HTML 4.01 Frameset spec or, if you want to step up to something more current that still supports frames, XHTML 1.0 Frameset.

The fact is that the HTML specifications change over time and you are trying to still use tags that have been removed from current specifications.

I hope I don't sound harsh, but you asked what the problem was and the center tag is the problem. The line breaks in the meta tags could be issues as well, but they likely aren't upsetting the validator. What upsets me is that you want to blame the W3C for a site not validating when it is your code that is wrong. I'm a really friendly guy and I'm happy to help you figure out where you're out of line with the spec, but please don't blame the organization because you don't know the spec. :(

[matauri]

Nomad, good idea to listen to Mik, Webnauts,Jay Drake, because they are right in their assessment. Your problem is outdated <center> tag.

To my knowledge the position of the <center> tag inside the

tag was never correct standard. Even though its been depreciated, the correct tag would be <p align="center">. Unless you wanted to center the paragraph in the page, then the <center> would have been on outside of

not in middle.

Good idea to learn CSS for future changes in standardisation.


Cindy

[TheWebDoctor(tm)]

Nomad,
First, I scanned over everything since I'm late for a meeting so IF I missed someone's comment, please excuse the error.

<center> tags are block elements just like

and others.

<center> can never be inside a

tag.

That's your problem.

You need to fix this with <p align="center">

Also, I noticed a comment that stated you should use a <div> inside your

. At least that's how I read it. That is incorrect. <div> is a layer and cannot be inside a lower-level block element like

.

A

can be inside a <div>

So, change your code to <p align="center"> and you're set.

I hope this had helped everyone.

BTW, if you have issues with W3C not responding it may be because you're not on the approved list. I get those emails. I haven't seen yours.

[JayDrake]

Originally Posted by TheWebDoctor(tm)

<center> tags are block elements just like

and others.

<center> can never be inside a

tag.

That's your problem.

You need to fix this with <p align="center">

You are right about how to fix it and also right about the block elements, but nonetheless, even if he used a <center> tag as a block element it would not validate against the specification he chose because of the deprecation of the <center> tag.

[LH]

The rule of thumb. If you open a page in a browser and see what you've intended to see, ignore all the validation errors.

Keep in mind though is you start writing user- or server side scripts. Those do not forgive easily.

In other words, if you used <center>, [b] or some other deprecated tags, they'll still work. Hey, in some parts of the world, IE3 is still a common occurrence and some webmasters still fight for Netscape Cause...

Bad news however, <blink> is not supported any longer.

;)

[LH]

what the heck are you using for editing?

<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR>

It's not a MS WORD plugin, is it?

[JayDrake]

Originally Posted by LH

The rule of thumb. If you open a page in a browser and see what you've intended to see, ignore all the validation errors.

Please tell me you are joking...

Originally Posted by LH

In other words, if you used <center>, [b] or some other deprecated tags, they'll still work. Hey, in some parts of the world, IE3 is still a common occurrence and some webmasters still fight for Netscape Cause...

Right... Sort of. Many browsers will enter 'glitch' mode and degrade to an earlier spec when you include code which is invalid for the spec you chose. This is not a good thing as your page may have looked fine to you because of the way it degraded in your browser, but not to someone else. You can buy a house or a car that wasn't built to spec as well and they might seem just fine, but eventually you'll get what you paid for.

[alienzhavelanded]

Looks like a bit of confusion on how the W3C validates pages to me. As others have said, there are diff types of code (HTML versions) to validate for. Fix your tags as others have suggested and quit arguing with them LOL

Happy coding,
The Martian