CSS validator

F

fuli open

I started to run the CSS validator on my files, and correct mistakes
until getting the message of 'Congratulations'. But for one file I
got the following message:

quote
W3C CSS Validator Results for http://www.pinyinology.com/wheel/
fortune.html

No error or warning found

No style sheet found
unquote

the URL is: http://www.pinyinology.com/wheel/fortune.html

It is possible that there is not error or warning. But there is a
very long style sheet. I wonder whether the validator itself made a
mistake. It found my file, but didn't do anything.

Help is appreciated.
fuli open
 
J

J.O. Aho

fuli said:
I started to run the CSS validator on my files, and correct mistakes
until getting the message of 'Congratulations'. But for one file I
got the following message:

quote
W3C CSS Validator Results for http://www.pinyinology.com/wheel/
fortune.html

No error or warning found

No style sheet found
unquote

the URL is: http://www.pinyinology.com/wheel/fortune.html

It is possible that there is not error or warning. But there is a
very long style sheet. I wonder whether the validator itself made a
mistake. It found my file, but didn't do anything.
Click to expand...

Could be so that the validator assumes your page is HTML4.01 and the xhtml you
are using makes it to miss the style definitions.

Either use:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

or

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

or

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

fuli said:
I started to run the CSS validator on my files, and correct mistakes
until getting the message of 'Congratulations'. But for one file I
got the following message:

quote
W3C CSS Validator Results for http://www.pinyinology.com/wheel/
fortune.html

No error or warning found

No style sheet found
unquote

the URL is: http://www.pinyinology.com/wheel/fortune.html

It is possible that there is not error or warning. But there is a
very long style sheet. I wonder whether the validator itself made a
mistake. It found my file, but didn't do anything.
Click to expand...

Your style definitions are within STYLE element, typically it is in a
separate sheet

<head>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="yourStyleSheet.css" type="text/css">
....

I believe the warning means that the validator can find no external sheet.
 
F

fuli open

fuli open wrote:
Click to expand...
Could be so that the validator assumes your page is HTML4.01 and the xhtml you
are using makes it to miss the style definitions.

Either use:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
Click to expand...

I have been doing in my way for years without realizing the difference
between xhtml and html4. It's rather hard for me do otherwise. Is it
possible to change the word 'Strict' to 'Transtional' in above doctype
and add a line in the <html> tag, so the above would become:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">

<html xmlns="http//www.w3.org/1999/xhml">

or

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

or

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
Click to expand...

If xhml things are already included in the code, I wonder whether the
above two doctypes are adequate for my page.

Thanks a lot again for enlightenment.
 
C

cwdjrxyz

I started to run the CSS validator on my files, and correct mistakes
until getting the message of 'Congratulations'. But for one file I
got the following message:

quote
W3C CSS Validator Results forhttp://www.pinyinology.com/wheel/
fortune.html

No error or warning found

No style sheet found
unquote

the URL is:http://www.pinyinology.com/wheel/fortune.html

It is possible that there is not error or warning. But there is a
very long style sheet. I wonder whether the validator itself made a
mistake. It found my file, but didn't do anything.

Help is appreciated.
fuli open
Click to expand...

Your page has 49 validation errors as written in XHTML. However, when
you go to the CSS validator, a line just under the URL form states:
"Note: If you want to validate your CSS style sheet embedded in an
(X)HTML document, you should first check that the (X)HTML you use is
valid." Thus you have two choices. Either you correct all of the
errors in the xhtml page or change the page to another format, such as
html 4.01 strict, and get it to validate fully. Then the CSS validator
should work. If the CSS validator still will not work, you should then
check your CSS for typos, etc. If the CSS validator still will not
work, then the W3C has a feedback link for reporting bugs.
 
J

J.O. Aho

fuli said:
On Feb 1, 7:56 am, "J.O. Aho" <[email protected]> wrote:
Click to expand...
I have been doing in my way for years without realizing the difference
between xhtml and html4. It's rather hard for me do otherwise. Is it
possible to change the word 'Strict' to 'Transtional' in above doctype
and add a line in the <html> tag, so the above would become:
Click to expand...

You get a bit of randomness when you don't use a doctype, and if you use a
html-doctype and xhtml-tags, you get randomness too.

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
Click to expand...

Sure, that works.

If xhml things are already included in the code, I wonder whether the
above two doctypes are adequate for my page.
Click to expand...

You can always remove xhtml and use pure html, if you want to use a html-doctype.
 
R

Roy A.

If xhml things are already included in the code, I wonder whether the
above two doctypes are adequate for my page.
Click to expand...

I think an HTML 4.01 doctype is more adequate for your page than
xhtml.

Your pages is rendering in backwards compatibility mode. If you don't
want to change that (in your existing pages) you could use:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">

But try to see if you can use standards mode.
 
D

dorayme

You can always remove xhtml and use pure html, if you want to use a
html-doctype.
Click to expand...

Before doing anything, note the wise words of my partner, old K:

"The expert advice is to use HTML 4.01, but you can of course use
technobabble-XHTML _if_ you are careful enough to follow
guidelines that effectively make it HTML 4.01 with pointless
kludges."

Not bad really!
 
R

Roy A.

Before doing anything, note the wise words of my partner, old K:

"The expert advice is to use HTML 4.01, but you can of course use
technobabble-XHTML _if_ you are careful enough to follow
guidelines that effectively make it HTML 4.01 with pointless
kludges."

Not bad really!
Click to expand...

Not bad, but she/he is merely annotating her/his own imagination.
 
F

fuli open

No, your "merely" makes it false.
Click to expand...

Many thanks to all of you for your advice. I would like to go with
either xhtml or html 4.01. The books I've read always say (x)html. So
I think they are same. Could anyone further advise me on the
difference between the two languages, so I can always stay with one.
Or you can recommend a book.

Also, which language do html professionals like better, xhtml or html
4.01? As an amateur, following suit is the best policy.

Thanks again.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

fuli open wrote:
Also, which language do html professionals like better, xhtml or html
4.01? As an amateur, following suit is the best policy.
Click to expand...

Briefly, use 4.01 Strict. Without meaning to sound snide here, if you
don't know the difference between XHTML and HTML you don't need XHTML.
XHTML has features that average web designer does not use|need and MSIE
has problems with properly delivered XHTML...
 
B

Blinky the Shark

Jonathan said:
fuli open wrote:


Briefly, use 4.01 Strict. Without meaning to sound snide here, if you
don't know the difference between XHTML and HTML you don't need XHTML.
XHTML has features that average web designer does not use|need and MSIE
has problems with properly delivered XHTML...
Click to expand...

Still, with OE7?
 
F

fuli open

Just use HTML 4.01.
Click to expand...

I tested my home page with html 4 strict on the html validator, and
was told as follows:

quote
No Character Encoding Found! Falling back to UTF-8.

This page is not Valid HTML 4.01 Strict!
unquote

In fact, I tested all the three headings, xhtml, html transitional and
html strict, but was told that my page was not valid any. And if the
page is not valid for any heading, do I still need to put a heading
there? Will the heading hurt the page?

The URL of the tested page is: www.pinyinology.com

Thanks for help.
fuli open
 
B

Blinky the Shark

Jonathan said:
Who knows! I'm happy with Win2000!
Click to expand...

That's what I'm using on my secondary box. And not as a matter of
legacy, either. A clean install from a non-upgrade W2K disk I picked up
last year.
 
B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

fuli said:
In fact, I tested all the three headings, xhtml, html transitional and
html strict, but was told that my page was not valid any.
Click to expand...

In order to be 'valid' you have to fix the errors. Your page has many of
them, no matter what doctype you choose. Or even if you don't.
And if the page is not valid for any heading, do I still need to put a
heading there?
Click to expand...

Depends on whether or not you intend to fix the errors.

Use HTML 4.01 Strict.
Will the heading hurt the page?
Click to expand...

No. The damage was already done. <g>
 
D

dorayme

"fuli open said:
I tested my home page with html 4 strict on the html validator, and
was told as follows:

quote
No Character Encoding Found! Falling back to UTF-8.

This page is not Valid HTML 4.01 Strict!
unquote

In fact, I tested all the three headings, xhtml, html transitional and
html strict, but was told that my page was not valid any. And if the
page is not valid for any heading, do I still need to put a heading
there? Will the heading hurt the page?

The URL of the tested page is: www.pinyinology.com
Click to expand...


For now, you could put in a line between <head> and </head> that
reads

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">

or

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">

Or contact your server admin and inquire how to set something on
this matter at the server end.

You cannot just change the doctype, you need to see what the
specs are for the 4.01 Strict doctype is and form your markup
accordingly. You are using a wrong "/" in some tags. This is the
style for XHTML, not appropriate here.

Come to think of it, with your marquees and embeds, perhaps
simpler for the moment for you to use a less strict doctype until
you have studied these matters further:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

or even

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Wilbur/HTML32.dtd">

But aim for 4.01 Strict. This will involve some work and study.

I enjoyed looking and hearing things on your site, nice
surprises. Some things worked in some of my browsers.
 
F

fuli open

For now, you could put in a line between <head> and </head> that
reads

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">

or

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">

Or contact your server admin and inquire how to set something on
this matter at the server end.

You cannot just change the doctype, you need to see what the
specs are for the 4.01 Strict doctype is and form your markup
accordingly. You are using a wrong "/" in some tags. This is the
style for XHTML, not appropriate here.

Come to think of it, with your marquees and embeds, perhaps
simpler for the moment for you to use a less strict doctype until
you have studied these matters further:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

or even

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Wilbur/HTML32.dtd">

But aim for 4.01 Strict. This will involve some work and study.

I enjoyed looking and hearing things on your site, nice
surprises. Some things worked in some of my browsers.
Click to expand...

I got 11 errors with the 4.01 Transitional, but 28 errors with 3.2
Final. It seems better to put the 4.01 Transitional there for the
moment. Thanks a lot for your help and encouraging comments.

fuli
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

CSS File does not really work? 1
CSS validator and Word pad 2
The color rule I coded in CSS doesn't go the same with HTML 1
Site Migration Ruined all my CSS?? 8
Working on mobile css menu with plenty of frustration! 2
XHMTL and CSS Problem 14
wtf? does the validator want now? 5
Scipy install Problems 1

Members online

Total: 46 (members: 3, guests: 43)
Robots: 164

Forum statistics

Threads
473,995
Messages
2,570,236
Members
46,822
Latest member
israfaceZa

Latest Threads

Top