W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > December 2007

Re: Validator vc MS IE 7

From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:07:19 +0200
Message-ID: <028d01c84a56$6b1f10a0$0500000a@DOCENDO>
To: "Bob Roske" <broske@hutchtel.net>, <www-validator@w3.org>

Bob Roske wrote:

> RE: http://www.w9bsp-w9ua.org/
> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w9bsp-w9ua.org%2F
> shows: This Page Is Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional!

Consider that as a bit pompous and misleading message. What it means is
that the documentwas processed by a validating SGML parser and found
valid, which means that it conforms to the syntactic restrictions
declared in the document itself (indirectly, via a reference to a
Document Type Definition).

> Microsoft IE 7.0.6000.16575 gives an 'Error on page' message with an
> icon in lower left corner, yellow triangle with a ! in it over a
> sheet of paper. (attached if it survived the mail servers).

That's IE's way of reporting a scripting error, in practice in
JavaScript code. I have no idea why my IE 7 does not report it (even
though I have set it to report scripting errors - this is a browser
option in IE), but apparently the reason that the onload attribute
contains a method (function) invocation with an undefined function.
Anyway, this has nothing to do with validation. All JavaScript code is
just boring data to a validator, not processed in any significant way,
still less executed.

> I'll find my error, just though you should know about his apparent
> discrepancy.

There's no discrepancy. A validator is not supposed to do anything with
JavaScript code. A validator is not supposed to report even all
syntactic errors in markup but only those that have been defined
formally in the DTD. More on this:

Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")

Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
Received on Saturday, 29 December 2007 20:08:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:54 UTC