sircharlo Posted August 1, 2007 Share Posted August 1, 2007 I really think you should validate your pages, as they don't validate.Isn't it a bit weird to have a website saying you should (and how to) have valid HTML or XHTML when your own isn't ?Just a thought... No offense meantYou really do a great job ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boen_robot Posted August 1, 2007 Share Posted August 1, 2007 The only "error" I see on the main page (and consequently all the rest) is the missing "xmlns" of the "html" element. Oddly enough, until the latest version of the validator, omitting it was not invalid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircharlo Posted August 3, 2007 Author Share Posted August 3, 2007 If you pass a page through Tidy, you'll see that their tables lack the summary attribute.However, using the SGML Parser or W3C's validator, it's true that they validate (except for the error boen_robot mentioned).Sorry ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boen_robot Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 That doesn't really matter. "Tidy" is targeted at bad/invalid code, and is especially good for people that are trying to make their sites WCAG conformant (read - that don't use tables for layout).The fact remains - W3Schools' pages ARE valid, except for the error above. That fixed and they'll be completely valid. Tidy or not. End of story. When exactly are the admins going to know about this and fix it is another question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircharlo Posted August 4, 2007 Author Share Posted August 4, 2007 When exactly are the admins going to know about this and fix it is another questionYup ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.