What is the error?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Samuël van Laere, Nov 16, 2003.

  1. Samuël van Laere, Nov 16, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Samuël van Laere wrote:

    > I've just validated the stylesheet i use on my site,
    > it seems to contain one error, but i haven't got a clue what that error is.
    > http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http://www.fortron.ne
    > t%2Ftest.css&warning=2&profile=css2&usermedium=all


    The problem is in this part:

    .navigation ul:a {
    background-color: transparent;
    background-image: none;
    color: #27527A;
    text-decoration: none;
    }

    "ul:a" means nothing.

    I have no idea why the validator couldn't give you the correct line
    number. That's really strange.

    --
    Bertilo Wennergren <> <http://www.bertilow.com>
     
    Bertilo Wennergren, Nov 16, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Toby A Inkster, Nov 16, 2003
    #3
  4. "Toby A Inkster" <> schreef in bericht
    news:p...
    > Samuël van Laere wrote:
    >
    > >

    http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http://www.fortron.ne
    > > t%2Ftest.css&warning=2&profile=css2&usermedium=all

    >
    > As well as the error Bertilo pointed out, replace the first "a" with
    > "a:link". No, they're not always the same thing!
    >
    > --
    > Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    > Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132
    >


    I've fixt the error you pointed out Toby thanks,
    but as for the error Bertilo mentioned:
    I can't seem to find a way to fix it.
    I changed .navigation ul: a
    to:
    .navigation ul a:

    But that isn't valid either, so what is the valid syntax?
    Seems wierd to me since .navigation ul a:hover is valid.
    Any idea's?


    With regards,
    Samuël van Laere
     
    Samuël van Laere, Nov 17, 2003
    #4
  5. Samuël van Laere

    rf Guest

    "Samuël van Laere" <> wrote in message
    news:1SUtb.170081$...
    > "Toby A Inkster" <> schreef in bericht
    > news:p...
    > > Samuël van Laere wrote:
    > >
    > > >


    > I can't seem to find a way to fix it.
    > I changed .navigation ul: a
    > to:
    > .navigation ul a:
    >
    > But that isn't valid either, so what is the valid syntax?


    ..navigation ul a

    > Seems wierd to me since .navigation ul a:hover is valid.


    it's :hover that gets added, not hover.

    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Nov 17, 2003
    #5
  6. "rf" <> schreef in bericht
    news:r5Vtb.13776$...
    >
    > "Samuël van Laere" <> wrote in message
    > news:1SUtb.170081$...
    > > "Toby A Inkster" <> schreef in bericht
    > > news:p...
    > > > Samuël van Laere wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >

    >
    > > I can't seem to find a way to fix it.
    > > I changed .navigation ul: a
    > > to:
    > > .navigation ul a:
    > >
    > > But that isn't valid either, so what is the valid syntax?

    >
    > .navigation ul a
    >
    > > Seems wierd to me since .navigation ul a:hover is valid.

    >
    > it's :hover that gets added, not hover.
    >
    > Cheers
    > Richard.
    >
    >


    Richard,

    I've tried your method in a different stylesheet:
    http://www.fortron.net/valid.css
    And it validates.

    But now the same definitions are in this stylesheet:
    http://www.fortron.net/test.css
    And it does not validate, but the validator doesn't point to anything else
    but the
    ..navigation ul a

    Any idea's what else might cause this problem?
    Cause i'm lost.


    Regards,
    Samuël van Laere
     
    Samuël van Laere, Nov 17, 2003
    #6
  7. "Samuël van Laere" <> schreef in bericht
    news:stVtb.170498$...
    > "rf" <> schreef in bericht
    > news:r5Vtb.13776$...
    > >
    > > "Samuël van Laere" <> wrote in message
    > > news:1SUtb.170081$...
    > > > "Toby A Inkster" <> schreef in

    bericht
    > > > news:p...
    > > > > Samuël van Laere wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > >

    > >
    > > > I can't seem to find a way to fix it.
    > > > I changed .navigation ul: a
    > > > to:
    > > > .navigation ul a:
    > > >
    > > > But that isn't valid either, so what is the valid syntax?

    > >
    > > .navigation ul a
    > >
    > > > Seems wierd to me since .navigation ul a:hover is valid.

    > >
    > > it's :hover that gets added, not hover.
    > >
    > > Cheers
    > > Richard.
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Richard,
    >
    > I've tried your method in a different stylesheet:
    > http://www.fortron.net/valid.css
    > And it validates.
    >
    > But now the same definitions are in this stylesheet:
    > http://www.fortron.net/test.css
    > And it does not validate, but the validator doesn't point to anything else
    > but the
    > .navigation ul a
    >
    > Any idea's what else might cause this problem?
    > Cause i'm lost.
    >
    >
    > Regards,
    > Samuël van Laere
    >


    Its fixt now, i misunderstood Toby <g>
    Thanks for the help everyone.


    Regards,
    Samuël van Laere
    the Netherlands
     
    Samuël van Laere, Nov 17, 2003
    #7
  8. "rf" <> schreef in bericht
    news:r5Vtb.13776$...
    >
    > "Samuël van Laere" <> wrote in message
    > news:1SUtb.170081$...
    > > "Toby A Inkster" <> schreef in bericht
    > > news:p...
    > > > Samuël van Laere wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >

    >
    > > I can't seem to find a way to fix it.
    > > I changed .navigation ul: a
    > > to:
    > > .navigation ul a:
    > >
    > > But that isn't valid either, so what is the valid syntax?

    >
    > .navigation ul a
    >
    > > Seems wierd to me since .navigation ul a:hover is valid.

    >
    > it's :hover that gets added, not hover.
    >
    > Cheers
    > Richard.
    >
    >


    Could i also use the following?
    ..navigation ul a:link

    Thanks in advance.


    Regards,
    Samuël
     
    Samuël van Laere, Nov 17, 2003
    #8
  9. Samuël van Laere

    Eric Bohlman Guest

    "Samuël van Laere" <> wrote in
    news:stVtb.170498$:

    > But now the same definitions are in this stylesheet:
    > http://www.fortron.net/test.css
    > And it does not validate, but the validator doesn't point to anything
    > else but the
    > .navigation ul a
    >
    > Any idea's what else might cause this problem?
    > Cause i'm lost.


    The validator must have been having a bad day, because I just ran it
    through the W3C's validator and it found no problems.

    As has been mentioned before, that really should be ".navigation ul
    a:link"; using an unqualified "a" in a selector can come back to bite you
    (if you ever introduce an <a name="..."> anchor into your HTML, it will
    pick up a style that's probably not what you intended).
     
    Eric Bohlman, Nov 17, 2003
    #9
  10. Samuël van Laere

    rf Guest

    "Samuël van Laere" <> wrote in message
    news:stVtb.170498$...
    > "rf" <> schreef in bericht
    > news:r5Vtb.13776$...


    > I've tried your method in a different stylesheet:
    > http://www.fortron.net/valid.css
    > And it validates.


    As it should :)

    > But now the same definitions are in this stylesheet:
    > http://www.fortron.net/test.css
    > And it does not validate, but the validator doesn't point to anything else
    > but the
    > .navigation ul a


    I just validated that URI here and it *does* validate but then again I see
    no such selector in that file. I see .navigation ul a:link etc but no
    ..navigation ul a.
    >
    > Any idea's what else might cause this problem?
    > Cause i'm lost.


    Stuck in a cache somewhere?

    Cheers
    Ricahrd.
     
    rf, Nov 17, 2003
    #10
  11. "Eric Bohlman" <> schreef in bericht
    news:Xns9435CC40DEA2ebohlmanomsdevcom@130.133.1.4...
    > "Samuël van Laere" <> wrote in
    > news:stVtb.170498$:
    >
    > > But now the same definitions are in this stylesheet:
    > > http://www.fortron.net/test.css
    > > And it does not validate, but the validator doesn't point to anything
    > > else but the
    > > .navigation ul a
    > >
    > > Any idea's what else might cause this problem?
    > > Cause i'm lost.

    >
    > The validator must have been having a bad day, because I just ran it
    > through the W3C's validator and it found no problems.
    >
    > As has been mentioned before, that really should be ".navigation ul
    > a:link"; using an unqualified "a" in a selector can come back to bite you
    > (if you ever introduce an <a name="..."> anchor into your HTML, it will
    > pick up a style that's probably not what you intended).


    It never occured to me that "a" could bite.
    I'll be more carefull next time.
    You've even answered my latest question so that why i updates the stylesheet
    with:
    ..navigation ul a:link

    Thanks for the help.


    Regards,
    Samuël van Laere
     
    Samuël van Laere, Nov 17, 2003
    #11
  12. "rf" <> schreef in bericht
    news:2RVtb.13816$...
    >
    > "Samuël van Laere" <> wrote in message
    > news:stVtb.170498$...
    > > "rf" <> schreef in bericht
    > > news:r5Vtb.13776$...

    >
    > > I've tried your method in a different stylesheet:
    > > http://www.fortron.net/valid.css
    > > And it validates.

    >
    > As it should :)
    >
    > > But now the same definitions are in this stylesheet:
    > > http://www.fortron.net/test.css
    > > And it does not validate, but the validator doesn't point to anything

    else
    > > but the
    > > .navigation ul a

    >
    > I just validated that URI here and it *does* validate but then again I see
    > no such selector in that file. I see .navigation ul a:link etc but no
    > .navigation ul a.
    > >
    > > Any idea's what else might cause this problem?
    > > Cause i'm lost.

    >
    > Stuck in a cache somewhere?
    >
    > Cheers
    > Ricahrd.
    >
    >


    Richard,
    The problem is now solved :))
    In fact i also did some other changes since TopStyle
    show some potentional trouble with this:
    border: bla bla;
    border-top: none;

    So i just changed it to:
    border-bottom: bla bla;
    border-left: bla bla;
    border-right: bla bla;
    border-top: none;

    Not that bla bla is valid in this context ;)
    Though i'm sure IE wouldn't mind <g>

    Thanks for the help folks.


    Regards,
    Samuël
     
    Samuël van Laere, Nov 17, 2003
    #12
    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. hfk0
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    21,678
  2. JavaQueries
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    3,677
    John C. Bollinger
    Mar 1, 2005
  3. Balaji
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    10,116
  4. Bishop
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    792
    Bishop
    Feb 24, 2007
  5. juvi
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,054
    Alexey Smirnov
    Jan 22, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page