W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-css@w3.org > August 2006

Re: HELP!!

From: Cindy Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 01:06:01 -0400
Message-ID: <44E004B9.8080702@gmail.com>
To: Bob Sindelar <rsindela@stny.rr.com>
CC: www-validator-css@w3.org

Hi, Bob..

You said:

 > Yesterday August 12, 2006,
 > http://home.stny.rr.com/sindelar/Feb23Schumer.htm CSS Validation page
 > gave me a "Congratulations" message and right to post W3C Icon and 
link to your service.
 >
 > Today, it fails to read my page or css code.

I just tried to validate your webpage myself. The message I received 
from the Markup Validator was:

"Sorry, I am unable to validate this document because on line 2  it 
contained one or more bytes that I cannot interpret as utf-8  (in other 
words, the bytes found are not valid values in the specified Character 
Encoding). Please check both the content of the file and the character 
encoding indication."

I've received that message myself under two different circumstances:

Circumstance #1) I had accidentally saved a file as a "unicode text 
document" rather than just plain "text document". Lost several hairs 
over this one until I caught it when trying to resave the document (by 
clicking "Save as") in hopes a newly saved document would somehow 
miraculously dislodge the offending character. The unicode text document 
was tossing in a few extra characters the Validator would not recognize.

Circumstance #2) In copying and pasting from .doc files to files saved 
as "text documents" in *Wordpad*, an "offending" character would 
accidentally be captured and saved on occasion. Hyphens and quotation 
marks were the main offenders in this case scenario. Opening my markup 
in Notepad has been the fastest way I have (again accidentally) found to 
detect if this is the case when the Validator issues the above "I cannot 
interpret" error message. The offending character will show up as a 
black box amongst the rest of the otherwise recognizable characters when 
viewed in Notepad..

An aside: You'll see tutorials speak of working in software comparable 
to Notepad for handcoding.. Circumstance #2 would be one of the reasons 
why.. Wordpad just remains worth the hair loss factor for me with 
considerations towards cognition (primarily) and eye strain (secondarily)..

Here's hoping one of the two circumstances above lends a little insight..

Peace.. :)

Cindy


- :: -
http://360.yahoo.com/Mountain_Splash
Georgia Voices That Count, 2005
Talking Rock, GA, USA
Received on Monday, 14 August 2006 04:42:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 June 2012 00:14:17 GMT