Re: Hi

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, PWP - Information wrote:

> I have a small question about the validator - it seems to spit dummies
> when it comes to whats in side the "no script" tag..

Was it you who asked about this in news:alt.html too (without mentioning
the URL there)? Then see my answer there for some other aspects of your
problem.

If you use a validator without understanding what it is and does, even at
an elementary level, which is probably what you mean by "dummy", then you
are actually spitting against the wind.

> http://www.professionalwebpages.biz/ws_management/maintenance/maintenance.aspx
>
> Can anyone suggest a reason as to why?

Your markup is invalid. The validator reports the markup errors. As to
why, only you can know why you have created invalid markup.

If you have specific questions about validator error messages, please
specify them, _after_ having checked the explanations to common error
messages at
http://validator.w3.org/docs/errors.html
(Which would probably be a little more useful if ordered alphabetically by
message text, but it's not that long, and you can use your browser's Find
function to locate the message you have got.)

> (its more about the "&" and "=" in the href  that its argueing about.)

It's not arguing anything. You have asked the validator to report markup
errors, and now you are blaiming it for doing exactly that.

And although it's a bit debatable _how_ the validator should report the
errors involved (I would say that for an XML doctype, &ul should be
reported not as an undefined entity reference without a terminating
semicolon but as violating the principle that the "&" character shall be
escaped when it does not start an entity reference or character reference
- which is really the primary problem here, and in most cases),
it is evident that the error messages you've got all relate to the use of
"&" (in URLs, though this does not matter). There's no reason to assume
that they have anything to do with <noscript> markup.

The solution is simple: use &amp; instead of &. Regarding <script>
elements when using XHTML, however, see http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#h-4.8

> the reason why i think it is the script tags is because further on down
> the page i have links that have similar urls with "&" and "=" in them

Actually the validator also reports other similar errors later on.

Generally, it is best to avoid very long source lines in (X)HTML,
partly because validators and checkers often report errors and issues
referring to line numbers. Using shorter lines you would get more specific
references. Just note that a line break is equivalent to a space.

> also can i can any opinions about that page?

This list is for discussing validation only. Try asking on other forums,
such as news:alt.html if you like, but don't forget the URL this time.

-- 
Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 03:23:39 UTC