- From: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 10:49:11 +0100
- To: BRIANCIZME <briancizme@yahoo.com>
- CC: "www-validator@w3.org" <www-validator@w3.org>
BRIANCIZME wrote: > This is just a suggestion. I validated a page and was missing <li> > tags in a <ul>. The validator recommended that I had rearranged > tags. The code was <div><ul></ul></div>. It recommended that > somewhere in my document I had reversed end tags as in </div></ul>. > I searched the document for ten minutes for the rearranged end tags. > I then used Tidy, it showed me where I missed the tags. After > thumping my forehead a couple of times for looking right over it I > proceeded to validate the page. I was just shocked that the validator > had suggested rearranged tags and not the missing <li> tags. Maybe > that will help some one else out in the future? Are you not being a little disingenuous, Brian ? Although the Validator's /first/ message suggests improper nesting, the second message addresses your very case : > Most likely, you nested tags and closed them in the wrong order. For > example <p><em>...</p> is not acceptable, as <em> must be closed > before <p>. Acceptable nesting is: <p><em>...</em></p> > > Another possibility is that you used an element which requires a > child element that you did not include. Hence the parent element is > "not finished", not complete. For instance, in HTML the <head> > element must contain a <title> child element, lists require > appropriate list items (<ul> and <ol> require <li>; <dl> requires > <dt> and <dd>), and so on. Philip Taylor
Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 09:49:41 UTC