Why can I not see the output with MY IE9?

[Ben Bacarisse]

If you look at my post it will explain, SCRIPT element *requires* both
opening and closing tags.

Yes, I saw that (and knew it anyway). If that's the point Doug Miller
was making, it seems an odd way to make it: the difference we were
invited to spot was that they all share the same error?

 

[richard]

If you look at my post it will explain, SCRIPT element *requires* both
opening and closing tags.

And if you had bothered to look at my reply to his shit, you'd find that he
left out the closing tag which IS there.
The original code was edited before posting.

This is what he edited.
<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
jwplayer.key="NIV";
</script>

The rules say that when there is no explicit closing tag such as with <br>
then the tag MUST include the closing /.
So it would be validated as <br />, not <br>.
<script></script> is valid.

I just ran it through the validator.
The code is kosher and validates.

 

[richard]

Yes, I saw that (and knew it anyway). If that's the point Doug Miller
was making, it seems an odd way to make it: the difference we were
invited to spot was that they all share the same error?

No. He's being an asshole.
<script></script>
is the proper method and it validates that way.
Now think about it.
If it were <script />, then how would the script be activated?

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

And if you had bothered to look at my reply to his shit, you'd find that he
left out the closing tag which IS there.
The original code was edited before posting.

This is what he edited.
<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
jwplayer.key="NIV";
</script>

The rules say that when there is no explicit closing tag such as with <br>
then the tag MUST include the closing /.
So it would be validated as <br />, not <br>.
<script></script> is valid.

I just ran it through the validator.
The code is kosher and validates.

Except you manage to sill get it wrong, from your source:

<script type="text/javascript" />

jwplayer.key="NIVuLjgvvzyNMt01wZFisaXc1W0uST73rr9H8g==";

</script>

 

[Tim Streater]

And if you had bothered to look at my reply to his shit, you'd find that he
left out the closing tag which IS there.
The original code was edited before posting.

This is what he edited.
<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
jwplayer.key="NIV";
</script>

The rules say that when there is no explicit closing tag such as with <br>
then the tag MUST include the closing /.
So it would be validated as <br />, not <br>.
<script></script> is valid.

I just ran it through the validator.
The code is kosher and validates.

As I've hinted before, but will now say explicitly: **** to validation.
Additionally, the <br /> shit is xhtml, which is now dead and buried and
may be ignored.

 

[Lewis]

Except you manage to sill get it wrong,

This is how you know the poster is authentic richard.

 

[Robert Baer]

www.mroldies.net/test3.html

* looks good,works, no framebox.

www.mroldies.net/screen9.jpg

* HostGator sez "ERROR 404 - PAGE NOT FOUND" (for the jpg)