W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > January 2016

Re: 3rd Party Resources

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:16:00 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+ri+V=So0zohT9zo=wxBpW5cNygCv2WeJtzpa+_6e2AYZSVUA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shaun Hogg <shaun.hogg@stripe4.co>
Cc: "www-validator@w3.org" <www-validator@w3.org>
Hi Shaun, not a direct answer to your questions, but it may help:
http://html5doctor.com/html5-check-it-before-you-wreck-it-with-miketm-smith/

--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>

On 25 January 2016 at 10:10, Shaun Hogg <shaun.hogg@stripe4.co> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Often we get clients asking us to ensure that their markup is 100% W3C
> valid. A recent example is Print-Print (print-print.co.uk
> <https://www.print-print.co.uk/>). The client in question thinks that the
> site needs to be totally valid in order to perform to it's max. While I
> know that this is not technically correct in terms of SEO etc; we need to
> make sure that the client is happy.
>
> Some of the issues, such as missing alt tags are the result of code passed
> from 3rd party companies. This site has a Feefo banner for example; which
> is passed through a JS snippet, but the rendered image does not have an Alt
> tag:- thus (rightly so) resulting in W3C Validator warnings.
>
> *Error*: An img element must have an alt attribute, except under certain
> conditions. For details, consult guidance on providing text alternatives
> for images <http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/Usage/TextAlternatives>.
>
> From line 499, column 13; to line 499, column 117
>
> *<img
> src="https://www.print-print.co.uk/skin/frontend/printprint/default/images/layout/feefo-gold.png"
> <https://www.print-print.co.uk/skin/frontend/printprint/default/images/layout/feefo-gold.png>
> />*↩
>
>
>
> Another example could be the Google validator tag. This is a code snippet
> given out by Google to verify a sites ownership, yet it results in errors
> been rendered in the validator.
>
> *Error*: Element meta
> <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#the-meta-element>
>  is missing one or more of the following attributes: itemprop, property.
>
> From line 846, column 1; to line 846, column 94
>
> </script>↩*<meta name="google-site-verification"
> content="tvpJfVDs6AQx0dwl_d-Iy2Yz5cu5W14RkcWcekUiH20" />*↩ ↩<!
>
>
>
> The same can be seen for the Facebook verification tag.
>
> *Error*: Attribute xmlns:fb not allowed here.
>
> From line 18, column 23; to line 20, column 80
>
> E 9]><!-->*↩ <html class="no-js" lang="en"
> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" <http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml>↩
> xmlns:og="http://ogp.me/ns#" <http://ogp.me/ns#>
> xmlns:fb="http://www.facebook.com/2008/fbml"
> <http://www.facebook.com/2008/fbml>>* ↩<!--
>
>
>
> I would really appreciate any thoughts on this. While someone technically
> minded like myself can look at these errors and justify them; clients who
> discover the Validator and want their sites 100% valid just see errors.
>
> Cheers,
> Shaun
>
> <https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
>
Received on Monday, 25 January 2016 11:17:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:18:14 UTC