W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > August 2009

Re: Validator

From: Gavin Landon <gavin.landon@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:02:46 -0500
Message-ID: <721d4bc80908271302h1e272445yb8075484ee439ebe@mail.gmail.com>
To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Cc: Public MWBP <public-bpwg@w3.org>
BTW, one of the errors that showed up as my issue, I started looking deeper
into actually points at a CSS on your domain.

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fvalidator.w3.org%2Fmobile%2Fcheck%3Ftask%3D20090827195137277%26docAddr%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fmobile.dp.bz%252F

So, your validator is validating your site as well as mine, instead of just
mine?

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Gavin Landon <gavin.landon@gmail.com>wrote:

>  On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:
>  >style.asp is served with a "text/html" content-type. I suspect your
>  >server is configured to map ".asp" files to "text/html" and ".css"
>  >files to "text/css". You can check that yourself with a browser
>  >extension such as Firebug for Firefox or with a network packet
>  >sniffer such as Wireshark.
>  >
>  >All desktop browsers and most mobile browsers probably ignore
>  >the content-type because they expect CSS and will try to parse
>  >the file as CSS anyway. That would still be better to set CSS
>  >content-type as "text/css".
>
> This may be true, since I'm using a hosting service, which I have no
> control over how they configure their IIS Server.
>
>  >The mobileOK Checker fails to identify the doctype because it is invalid.
>
>  >It is invalid because you are using a "PUBLIC" doctype, and in that case,
>
>  >a system identifier must follow the public identifier, as defined in the
>  >XML spec:
>  > http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#NT-ExternalID
>  >
>  >The error in the doctype is returned by the mobileOK Checker as a
> not-so-clear
>  >markup validation error: "White spaces are required between publicId and
>  >systemId". Not finding a valid DOCTYPE, the mobileOK Checker also
> triggers
>  >the "no doctype found" error, which is a bit awkward, I must say.
>  >
>  >Two things are worth noting here:
>  >1. I do not know at this point why the markup validation service does not
>
>  >complain about your doctype declaration. It may be that such doctype
>  >declarations are possible in HTML 4.01, but I couldn't find any
>  >information in the relevant section of the HTML 4.01 spec:
>  > http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/global.html#h-7.2
>  >I need to investigate.
>  >
>  >2. It is extremely hard to report error messages as they should be
>  >reported so that a human being can understand them :(
>
> It doesn't like PUBLIC?  I went to google.com/m to see how they use it,
> and they are using public.  I copied their line and pasted it in place of
> mine and I think it breaks MobileOK.  The results ani-image is moving, but
> it never goes to the next page.  I removed the DOCTYPE and it works, added
> it back and it freezes again.   Google uses:
> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//WAPFORUM//DTD XHTML Mobile 1.0//EN" "
> http://www.wapforum.org/DTD/xhtml-mobile10.dtd"><http://www.wapforum.org/DTD/xhtml-mobile10.dtd%22%3E>
> Now, this completely messes my site up, so I removed it again.
> I thought I understood the meaning of doctype, but I must be missing
> something, even still.
>
>  >Neither the HTML page nor the CSS page contain any character encoding
>  >declaration. This means browsers need to "sniff and guess" the encoding.
>  >Most of the time, they will just get it right, in particular when
>  >documents are written in English because they won't contain any
>  >"weird" character.
> Ok, after that being said along with the information mentioned above, I'm
> noticing that MobileOK is looking at more of what the server says, rather
> than the code within the page says.  I'm not so sure this is a good idea or
> why we have HTML tags that are ignored, since most people like myself use a
> hosting provider and have no control over how the server is configured.
> That being said, I added a Header of ContentType within my server side code
> and it cleared up some of the errors.   I did this for all my pages as well
> as the style sheet.
>
> Note: MobileOK, has the message of:
> The document is not served as "application/xhtml+xml"
>
> No where do I specify it is, so why would it be looking for ASP pages to be
> served as an application?   If I set my pages to this, it prompts to
> download the page instead of displaying them.
>
>  >Any text file transmitted on the network should define its encoding,
>  >be it a CSS file or an HTML document. Probably something like 99.99%
>  >of all styles written in CSS files use regular ASCII characters that
>  >happen to be encoded the same way in most encodings, so that's not
>  >such a big deal as far as CSS is concerned.
>
>  >The CSS specification explains that other encodings may be used when
> necessary:
>  > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#escaping
>
> I got another error, before MobileOK stopped working all together for me.
>



-- 
Gavin
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2009 20:03:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:54 UTC