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

Re: Validator

From: Gavin Landon <gavin.landon@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:12:45 -0500
Message-ID: <721d4bc80908310712u2adac532g74231d26a0da153d@mail.gmail.com>
To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Cc: Public MWBP <public-bpwg@w3.org>
I was wondering why that warning of 404's kept coming up.  ah ha..

On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:

> Argh. Yes, that is unclear, isn't it?
>
> Your page links to the W3C CSS validation service.
> The mobileOK Checker makes sure all links in a page target an existing
> page, because clicking on a broken link negatively affects user experience
> on mobile devices (more than on desktop browsers). It reports failures.
>
> But... to prevent looping, the CSS validation service is configured to
> return an HTTP error when the request originates from another W3C server
> (here, the mobileOK Checker). The mobileOK Checker thus receives an error
> when it checks the link to the CSS validator, and reports it. Yes, the
> mobileOK Checker is pretty dumb. It should know about a few exceptions such
> as this one.
>
> Francois.
>
>
> Gavin Landon wrote:
>
>> 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<mailto:
>> gavin.landon@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>    On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org
>>     <mailto: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
>>    <http://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
>>
>


-- 
Gavin
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 14:13:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:09:02 UTC