- From: John Littler <linuxmusic@crosswinds.net>
- Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 15:54:54 +1100 (EST)
- To: Alexander Biron <biron@ifh.de>
- Cc: John Littler <linuxmusic@crosswinds.net>, html-tidy@w3.org
quoting Alexander Biron: > Hi John > > > I did not experience any such difficutlties. One commmon problem with > nested tables occurs when the author omits the optinoal end tags. If > this is not the reason of your problem, please provide the URL of the > page tidy has problems with. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "optional end tags" ... My reading of the w3 stuff (after I validated) suggested that nested tables weren't a Good Thing and so the output of html tidy was perfectly valid ... but not useful. The URL is http://www.crosswinds.net/~linuxmusic/index.html pay no mind to all the font stuff - dreamweaver did that on one trip into it and I haven't cleared it up yet > > ah, also it picks up <img> tags and > > declares no "alt"s have been used when the <img> tag is > > used as "background=" in a <td>. That's bogus. > > Depends on your point of view. The W3C HTML 4.x standards defines alt as > being a required attribute for any kind of image. When tidy parses your > document, it tries to associate the most appropriate HTML standard to > your document and follows that standards requirements. So if tidy parses > your document as HTML 4.0, tidy does not care whether that standard is > bogus or not, it just follows it. Yes, that's fair enough. It's just that most (all?) graphical browsers won't display the "alt" so maybe it's not bogus - but it is redundant in that case. > BTW: you can define the standard your document follows with the Doctype > declaration at the top of your document. Hmm, I tried 4.00 transitional but the validator said I wasn't using that :( Cheers John -- http://linuxmusic.cjb.net
Received on Saturday, 4 December 1999 22:27:26 UTC