Firefox shows correctly? Validator no help

Discussion in 'HTML' started by richard, Sep 18, 2006.

  1. richard

    richard Guest

    www.1-small-world.com/index2.html

    Validator now shows 2 errors.

    1) "character data not allowed here". Then where and how should it be
    placed?

    2) end tag for "head" is unfinished.
    So what am I missing here?
     
    richard, Sep 18, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. richard wrote:
    > www.1-small-world.com/index2.html
    >
    > Validator now shows 2 errors.
    >
    > 1) "character data not allowed here". Then where and how should it be
    > placed?
    >
    > 2) end tag for "head" is unfinished.
    > So what am I missing here?
    >

    This for both errors is this

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    charset=windows-1252" />
    ^^^
    That is *XHTML* not *HTML* syntax for single tag elements. Should be:

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    charset=windows-1252">

    Also do yourself a favor, start new projects with strict and not
    transitional DOCTYPE.

    <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 18, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. richard

    richard Guest

    "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote in message
    news:75d88$450eda7a$40cba7ce$...
    > richard wrote:
    >> www.1-small-world.com/index2.html
    >>
    >> Validator now shows 2 errors.
    >>
    >> 1) "character data not allowed here". Then where and how should it be
    >> placed?
    >>
    >> 2) end tag for "head" is unfinished.
    >> So what am I missing here?
    >>

    > This for both errors is this
    >
    > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    > charset=windows-1252" />
    > ^^^
    > That is *XHTML* not *HTML* syntax for single tag elements. Should be:
    >
    > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    > charset=windows-1252">
    >
    > Also do yourself a favor, start new projects with strict and not
    > transitional DOCTYPE.
    >
    > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
    > "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">



    Actually, found I had two statements stating the same thing. Eliminated the
    wrong one and now only have 1 error.
    Thanks.
     
    richard, Sep 18, 2006
    #3
  4. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <75d88$450eda7a$40cba7ce$>,
    "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:

    > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    > charset=windows-1252" />
    > ^^^


    In my newsreader, MT, the little hat indicators are misplaced to
    under the "s-12" instead of the " /"

    Some fault at my end (I think) because this has happened before
    from a post from you where it was clear what you meant.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 18, 2006
    #4
  5. dorayme wrote:
    > In article <75d88$450eda7a$40cba7ce$>,
    > "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:
    >
    >> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    >> charset=windows-1252" />
    >> ^^^

    >
    > In my newsreader, MT, the little hat indicators are misplaced to
    > under the "s-12" instead of the " /"
    >
    > Some fault at my end (I think) because this has happened before
    > from a post from you where it was clear what you meant.
    >


    You're not using a fixed width font for your newsreader. Change to
    something like Courier.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 18, 2006
    #5
  6. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <8e5ac$450f1a7a$40cba7a3$>,
    "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:

    > dorayme wrote:
    > > In article <75d88$450eda7a$40cba7ce$>,
    > > "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    > >> charset=windows-1252" />
    > >> ^^^

    > >
    > > In my newsreader, MT, the little hat indicators are misplaced to
    > > under the "s-12" instead of the " /"
    > >
    > > Some fault at my end (I think) because this has happened before
    > > from a post from you where it was clear what you meant.
    > >

    >
    > You're not using a fixed width font for your newsreader. Change to
    > something like Courier.


    Yes, you are right. Of course! I now recall not doing this for a
    reason and I just rediscovered the reason, my fixed font in my MT
    is Courier and it looks faded and harder to read on my screens in
    this particular newsreader (not in text editors or anywhere
    else). But I better try a few other fixed fonts or get some
    others... For sheer ease of reading on my Mac it has always been
    Geneva, been so since the days of the Mac SE for me.

    On how things look, Luigi's posts alone appear weird on my app
    and I need to "compose as Western Mac" in any replies, I am not
    kidding you that I have to change it from "Simplified Chinese" I
    have been meaning to post gifs of what happens to amuse and
    bemuse Luigi.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 18, 2006
    #6
  7. richard

    patrick j Guest

    On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:41:02 +0100, dorayme wrote
    (in article
    <>):

    > Yes, you are right. Of course! I now recall not doing this for a
    > reason and I just rediscovered the reason, my fixed font in my MT
    > is Courier and it looks faded and harder to read on my screens in
    > this particular newsreader (not in text editors or anywhere
    > else). But I better try a few other fixed fonts or get some
    > others... For sheer ease of reading on my Mac it has always been
    > Geneva, been so since the days of the Mac SE for me.


    You might like Monaco. That's what I use. I've never liked Courier and
    Courier New doesn't appeal either :)

    --
    Patrick
    Brighton, UK
     
    patrick j, Sep 19, 2006
    #7
  8. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    patrick j <> wrote:

    > On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:41:02 +0100, dorayme wrote
    > (in article
    > <>):
    >
    > > Yes, you are right. Of course! I now recall not doing this for a
    > > reason and I just rediscovered the reason, my fixed font in my MT
    > > is Courier and it looks faded and harder to read on my screens in
    > > this particular newsreader (not in text editors or anywhere
    > > else). But I better try a few other fixed fonts or get some
    > > others... For sheer ease of reading on my Mac it has always been
    > > Geneva, been so since the days of the Mac SE for me.

    >
    > You might like Monaco. That's what I use. I've never liked Courier and
    > Courier New doesn't appeal either :)


    Yes, thanks Patrick, I am looking at this in Monaco now. I think
    this is what I had my old OE on OS 9 set in. For some reason it
    looks a bit flowery for my taste now! Nice but. I have also since
    discovered that it is actually 'Courier New' that has the faded
    look, Courier (proper) seems black enough.

    You do understand that all this is so I can see the little cute
    markers that JL so often kindly illustrates his posts with. I
    will be giving up a really plain and unobtrusive, perfectly
    shaded, perfectly-on-screen-readable Geneva for him. I hope he
    damn well appreciates it. :)

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 19, 2006
    #8
  9. richard

    patrick j Guest

    On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 00:47:11 +0100, dorayme wrote
    (in article
    <>):

    > You do understand that all this is so I can see the little cute
    > markers that JL so often kindly illustrates his posts with. I
    > will be giving up a really plain and unobtrusive, perfectly
    > shaded, perfectly-on-screen-readable Geneva for him. I hope he
    > damn well appreciates it. :)


    Yes I'm sure he does appreciate it :)

    One rather excellent thing about MacSOUP newsreader which I used to use
    before I started using Hogwasher was that with MacSOUP you had an
    "alternative font" option which meant that by a simple key combination
    (I think it was command-U) you could change the font from something
    nice like, say Geneva, to something not as nice but fixed-width like
    Courier or Monaco.

    This means of course that when you see an "ASCII" graphic in a posting
    you would just change to the fixed-width font.

    --
    Patrick
    Brighton, UK
     
    patrick j, Sep 19, 2006
    #9
  10. patrick j wrote:
    > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 00:47:11 +0100, dorayme wrote
    > (in article
    > <>):
    >
    >> You do understand that all this is so I can see the little cute
    >> markers that JL so often kindly illustrates his posts with. I
    >> will be giving up a really plain and unobtrusive, perfectly
    >> shaded, perfectly-on-screen-readable Geneva for him. I hope he
    >> damn well appreciates it. :)


    That's cuz I'm an R-tist!
    >
    > Yes I'm sure he does appreciate it :)
    >
    > One rather excellent thing about MacSOUP newsreader which I used to use
    > before I started using Hogwasher was that with MacSOUP you had an
    > "alternative font" option which meant that by a simple key combination
    > (I think it was command-U) you could change the font from something
    > nice like, say Geneva, to something not as nice but fixed-width like
    > Courier or Monaco.
    >


    How about a sans-serif font that is also monospace like "Monospace 821
    BT Roman"? Or "Prestige 12 Pitch BT Roman" which is bolder than Courier?


    > This means of course that when you see an "ASCII" graphic in a posting
    > you would just change to the fixed-width font.
    >



    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 19, 2006
    #10
  11. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    patrick j <> wrote:

    > One rather excellent thing about MacSOUP newsreader which I used to use
    > before I started using Hogwasher was that with MacSOUP you had an
    > "alternative font" option which meant that by a simple key combination
    > (I think it was command-U) you could change the font from something
    > nice like, say Geneva, to something not as nice but fixed-width like
    > Courier or Monaco.
    >
    > This means of course that when you see an "ASCII" graphic in a posting
    > you would just change to the fixed-width font.


    Neat!

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 19, 2006
    #11
  12. richard

    Dan Guest

    Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    > That is *XHTML* not *HTML* syntax for single tag elements. Should be:
    >
    > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    > charset=windows-1252">


    Though it would be better to get rid of that meta tag altogether and be
    sure your server sends the proper HTTP headers in the first place, so
    you don't end up having to do a cheap imitation of them via meta tags.
    And it would be best to avoid proprietary character encodings such as
    windows-1252 anyway.

    --
    Dan
     
    Dan, Sep 19, 2006
    #12
  13. On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 02:50:28 +0100, patrick j wrote
    (in article <>):

    > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 00:47:11 +0100, dorayme wrote
    > (in article
    > <>):
    >
    >> You do understand that all this is so I can see the little cute
    >> markers that JL so often kindly illustrates his posts with. I
    >> will be giving up a really plain and unobtrusive, perfectly
    >> shaded, perfectly-on-screen-readable Geneva for him. I hope he
    >> damn well appreciates it. :)

    >
    > Yes I'm sure he does appreciate it :)
    >
    > One rather excellent thing about MacSOUP newsreader which I used to use
    > before I started using Hogwasher was that with MacSOUP you had an
    > "alternative font" option which meant that by a simple key combination
    > (I think it was command-U) you could change the font from something
    > nice like, say Geneva, to something not as nice but fixed-width like
    > Courier or Monaco.
    >
    > This means of course that when you see an "ASCII" graphic in a posting
    > you would just change to the fixed-width font.


    I do so agree with you. This is the one thing I find less user-friendly with
    Hogwasher compared with my old Windows newsreader, which was Forte Agent. If
    I really really want to see some ASCII art then I change my prefs to a fixed
    width font, then change them back afterwards - because I really don't find
    messages as easy to read in such a font. At the moment I use Lucida Grande,
    which I really like.



    --
    Sally in Shropshire, UK
    bed and breakfast near Ludlow: http://www.stonybrook-ludlow.co.uk
    Burne-Jones/William Morris window in Shropshire church:
    http://www.whitton-stmarys.org.uk
     
    Sally Thompson, Sep 19, 2006
    #13
  14. richard

    Andy Dingley Guest

    Dan wrote:

    > Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    > > That is *XHTML* not *HTML* syntax for single tag elements. Should be:
    > >
    > > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
    > > charset=windows-1252">

    >
    > Though it would be better to get rid of that meta tag altogether


    Is there ever a possibility of a <meta> encoding being useful in valid
    XHTML ? If it's not UTF, then you must already have made it manifest
    from externally to the file, just to keep it as valid XML. Even if
    you're on a filesystem and not a web server, you'd be forced to put it
    into the XML PI
     
    Andy Dingley, Sep 19, 2006
    #14
  15. On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Andy Dingley wrote:

    > Is there ever a possibility of a <meta> encoding being useful in valid
    > XHTML ?


    Only in 1.0 Appendix C, and then it's only there for HTML
    compatibility. Even there, it's not a necessity.

    (I suspect that your question was rhetorical and you already know the
    answer, but anyhow, that's my "take".)

    > If it's not UTF, then you must already have made it manifest
    > from externally to the file, just to keep it as valid XML. Even if
    > you're on a filesystem and not a web server, you'd be forced to put it
    > into the XML PI


    Indeed. From a deeper theoretical standpoint, I really hate this idea
    of polluting the data with its own metadata; but it's the way things
    went - I guess there's no use crying over it now. Just that XML moved
    the pollution from a <meta...> to the <?xml...> thingy. The right
    place for such metadata (on the web) is the HTTP protocol, not stashed
    inside the data itself. The problem, as you rightly point out, is
    what to do with static files that aren't being accessed by HTTP.
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Sep 19, 2006
    #15
  16. richard

    Andy Dingley Guest

    Alan J. Flavell wrote:

    > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Andy Dingley wrote:
    >
    > > Is there ever a possibility of a <meta> encoding being useful in valid
    > > XHTML ?

    >
    > Only in 1.0 Appendix C, and then it's only there for HTML
    > compatibility. Even there, it's not a necessity.


    I'm not sure whether it's "not a necessity" or "only possibly useful in
    the face of deliberate bad practice".

    You can't store XHTML Appendix C as a file, it's only _possible_ as a
    HTTP document. If it's a file, then it reverts to plain XML. So in
    either case, you _can_ send the appropriate header, or you're back to
    being forced to use the XML PI.

    You might guess that I've been wrangling several MB of badly
    misbegotten HTML as local files of late, supposedly an "on-line help
    system", extruded from the rump end of an abomination called
    "AuthorIt". They're not pretty.
     
    Andy Dingley, Sep 19, 2006
    #16
  17. richard

    patrick j Guest

    On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:20:47 +0100, Sally Thompson wrote
    (in article <>):

    > At the moment I use Lucida Grande, which I really like.


    I like Lucida Grande as well. I have a great dislike of fixed-width
    fonts and in fact for newsreading I use Geneva most usually personally.
    It's a very very classic Mac font of course but I find so easy and
    pleasant on the eye.

    I very much like browsing through my Font Book (I have a great love o
    fonts) and I frequently change the font for newsreading but keep coming
    back to Geneva eventually.

    I actually have a theory that fixed width fonts tend to bring out the
    aggressive side in people but I have a great many "theories" :)

    --
    Patrick
    Brighton, UK
     
    patrick j, Sep 20, 2006
    #17
  18. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    patrick j <> wrote:

    > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:20:47 +0100, Sally Thompson wrote
    > (in article <>):
    >
    > > At the moment I use Lucida Grande, which I really like.

    >
    > I like Lucida Grande as well. I have a great dislike of fixed-width
    > fonts and in fact for newsreading I use Geneva most usually personally.
    > It's a very very classic Mac font of course but I find so easy and
    > pleasant on the eye.
    >
    > I very much like browsing through my Font Book (I have a great love o
    > fonts) and I frequently change the font for newsreading but keep coming
    > back to Geneva eventually.
    >
    > I actually have a theory that fixed width fonts tend to bring out the
    > aggressive side in people but I have a great many "theories" :)


    !!!

    I like the sound of theories like this. I wrote a story about
    letters and fonts once for a website. Must dig it out to amuse
    you... it was made in the days when I thought CSS was some
    electricity or water board utility.

    I have always been miffed as to why Geneva always looks so damned
    good on Macs. I always come back to it from SE days to now.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 20, 2006
    #18
  19. richard

    Toby Inkster Guest

    patrick j wrote:

    > I like Lucida Grande as well.


    As do I. I also enjoy Optima and Gill Sans.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
     
    Toby Inkster, Sep 20, 2006
    #19
    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. =?Utf-8?B?cG11ZA==?=
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    802
    =?Utf-8?B?cG11ZA==?=
    Feb 11, 2005
  2. gce
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    773
  3. Daniel Forster

    IE shows site correct - Firefox not

    Daniel Forster, Jan 30, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    558
    Richard
    Jan 31, 2005
  4. Paul

    range validator not working correctly

    Paul, Nov 15, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net Web Controls
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    378
  5. Gianni

    IE shows false and Firefox shows true

    Gianni, Jul 10, 2009, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    458
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
    Jul 10, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page