confused - html validates, css validates but validate css from the html causes errors

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record, Nov 14, 2004.

  1. If you want to see the actual code, I would have to set up a dummy
    site with the logo doctored to hide the organisation.

    HTML Validates
    w3c html validator http://validator.w3.org/ says
    This Page Is Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional!

    CSS Validates (second link from html validator)
    w3c css validator http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ says
    Congratulations! This document validates as CSS!
    Warnings URI :(link zapped)
    Line : 0 font-family: You are encouraged to offer a
    generic family as a last alternative

    CSS does not validate (First link from html validator)
    http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=(link zapped) says
    Errors
    URI : (link zapped)
    Line: 14 Property layer-background-color doesn't exist : #66bad4

    Line: 32 Property layer-background-color doesn't exist : #66bad4

    Warnings
    URI : (link zapped) Line : 0 font-family: You are encouraged to
    offer a generic family as a last alternative

    The colour in lines 14 and 32 is a mucky pale blue set by Dreamweaver
    colour picker from our logo.

    A sample of the css is:
    .mbutton {
    font-family : Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
    font-style : normal;
    font-weight : bold;
    color : #ffffff;
    text-decoration : none;
    text-align : center;
    vertical-align : middle;

    Using Bobby http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp
    & WebXact http://webxact.watchfire.com/ the pages pass all the
    automatic validations to AAA or priority 3 whichever way you count.
    (I will never put the above on any of my pages as the moment I do will
    be the moment I break it).

    <A message to top posters. Type your reply here>

    --
    Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur
    built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
     
    Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record, Nov 14, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record

    brucie Guest

    In alt.html Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record said:

    > If you want to see the actual code, I would have to set up a dummy
    > site with the logo doctored to hide the organisation.


    good idea

    > Line : 0 font-family: You are encouraged to offer a
    > generic family as a last alternative


    15.2.6 Generic font families
    http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#generic-font-families

    if you just specify a generic family (e.g. font-family:sans-serif;)
    rather than a specific font name the visitor gets their preferred font
    for that family and you get to keep the look you want. everyone's
    giggly.

    > Line: 14 Property layer-background-color doesn't exist : #66bad4


    just what it says. layer isn't even a html element.

    > Using Bobby http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp


    · bobby cant even correctly parse a valid html document so don't take
    what it says as gospel.

    · design your site to be accessible not to appease a program or list of
    checkpoints. they're not the same thing and sometimes conflict.

    · if you come across a site claiming 'AAA' you know its been designed to
    satisfy a checklist, not for the disabled visitor.

    · you can guess but cant claim the site is accessible until its tested
    by the disabled.

    Accessibility checking - can programs do it? (not really)
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www/acctools.html



    --
    the facts and opinions expressed by brucies
    l i t t l e v o i c e s
    are not necessarily the same as those held by brucie.
     
    brucie, Nov 14, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 09:11:27 GMT, Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    <> wrote:

    >If you want to see the actual code, I would have to set up a dummy
    >site with the logo doctored to hide the organisation.


    If you want us to _fix_ the actual code for you, then you will have to
    let us see it.

    > Line: 14 Property layer-background-color doesn't exist : #66bad4


    Look for an attempt to set the background-color in your CSS, and a
    word "layer" somewhere nearby, and a subtle syntax error that is
    causing them to be concatenated.

    --
    Smert' spamionam
     
    Andy Dingley, Nov 14, 2004
    #3
  4. Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record

    Steve Pugh Guest

    On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:33:26 +0000, Andy Dingley
    <> wrote:
    >On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 09:11:27 GMT, Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> Line: 14 Property layer-background-color doesn't exist : #66bad4

    >
    >Look for an attempt to set the background-color in your CSS, and a
    >word "layer" somewhere nearby, and a subtle syntax error that is
    >causing them to be concatenated.


    No. Netscape 4 supported a custom CSS property called
    layer-background-color which set the background colour for positioned
    elements. The difference between layer-background-color and
    background-color was teh layer-background-color created a background
    that went all the way to the border whilst background-color left a
    transparent gap just inside the border.

    So back in 1998 there was reason to use layer-background-color to
    create cross-browser conformity of presentation. But not in 2004.

    Steve
     
    Steve Pugh, Nov 14, 2004
    #4
  5. On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:23:48 +0000, Steve Pugh <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:33:26 +0000, Andy Dingley
    ><> wrote:
    >>On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 09:11:27 GMT, Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    >><> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Line: 14 Property layer-background-color doesn't exist : #66bad4

    >>
    >>Look for an attempt to set the background-color in your CSS, and a
    >>word "layer" somewhere nearby, and a subtle syntax error that is
    >>causing them to be concatenated.

    >
    >No. Netscape 4 supported a custom CSS property called
    >layer-background-color which set the background colour for positioned
    >elements. The difference between layer-background-color and
    >background-color was teh layer-background-color created a background
    >that went all the way to the border whilst background-color left a
    >transparent gap just inside the border.
    >
    >So back in 1998 there was reason to use layer-background-color to
    >create cross-browser conformity of presentation. But not in 2004.
    >
    > Steve


    This is part of the offending line - as created by Dreamweaver MX (not
    2004)

    <div id="menu" style="position:absolute; z-index:2; top: 10px; left:
    10px; background-color: #66BAD4; layer-background-color: #66BAD4;
    border: 1px none #000000;">

    I will test from work tomorrow without the layer-background-color:
    #66BAD4; - I hadn't actually noticed it had been used twice in there.

    <A message to top posters. Type your reply here>

    --
    Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur
    built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
     
    Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record, Nov 14, 2004
    #5
  6. Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:15:56 GMT, Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    <> wrote:

    >
    >This is part of the offending line - as created by Dreamweaver MX (not
    >2004)
    >
    ><div id="menu" style="position:absolute; z-index:2; top: 10px; left:
    >10px; background-color: #66BAD4; layer-background-color: #66BAD4;
    >border: 1px none #000000;">


    So why the hell couldn't you sort this out yourself from the very
    obvious error message you were given ? And why expect other people
    to play twenty questions on code we can't even see ?

    <plonk>
     
    Andy Dingley, Nov 15, 2004
    #6
  7. On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:33:51 +0000, Andy Dingley
    <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:15:56 GMT, Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>This is part of the offending line - as created by Dreamweaver MX (not
    >>2004)
    >>
    >><div id="menu" style="position:absolute; z-index:2; top: 10px; left:
    >>10px; background-color: #66BAD4; layer-background-color: #66BAD4;
    >>border: 1px none #000000;">

    >
    >So why the hell couldn't you sort this out yourself from the very
    >obvious error message you were given ? And why expect other people
    >to play twenty questions on code we can't even see ?
    >
    ><plonk>

    Because it never occurred to me that the code was wrong.
    The code validated until I validated the CSS which made me think there
    was a problem with the CSS.

    <A message to top posters. Type your reply here>

    --
    Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur
    built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
     
    Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record, Nov 15, 2004
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Eric Lilja
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,495
    Joseph Kesselman
    Feb 21, 2007
  2. Radu
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    418
  3. dorayme
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    405
    dorayme
    Nov 7, 2010
  4. 123Jim
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    436
    123Jim
    Nov 6, 2010
  5. Yonih
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    84
    Yonih
    Jun 4, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page