XHTML 1.1, language and Bobby validator

[.:|:.]

Hi!
I'm trying to validate my page http://tinyurl.com/8ukw6
with Bobby at http://webxact.watchfire.com/

Validation for "W3C WCAG P3" fails because of /"Guideline
4.3: Identify the language of the text."/
Yet the head contains the tag
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="it" />

The solution suggested at
http://webxact2.watchfire.com/themes/standard-en-us/help/HIDD_WDContent_G125.html
says
/"...The HTML element at the beginning of each page should
use the HTML 4.0 "lang" attribute..."/

But that's not valid in xhtml 1.1!

So, how do I make Bobby happy without going back to HTML 4.0?

Thanks a lot!

..:|:.

 

[Mitja Trampus]

Hi!
I'm trying to validate my page http://tinyurl.com/8ukw6
with Bobby at http://webxact.watchfire.com/

The solution suggested at
http://webxact2.watchfire.com/themes/standard-en-us/help/HIDD_WDContent_G125.html
says
/"...The HTML element at the beginning of each page should
use the HTML 4.0 "lang" attribute..."/

But that's not valid in xhtml 1.1!

I'm not familiar with Bobby, but have you tried xml:lang?
See also
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-i18n-html-tech-lang-20050224/#ri20040429.092928424

 

[Disco Octopus]

Hi!

.:|:.

are you related Prince?

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

I'm trying to validate my page http://tinyurl.com/8ukw6
with Bobby at http://webxact.watchfire.com/

Bobby is not a validator. It is an overrated and mostly useless checker.

Validation for "W3C WCAG P3" fails because of /"Guideline
4.3: Identify the language of the text."/

That's an accessibility guideline, not a validity issue.

Yet the head contains the tag
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="it" />

That's irrelevant. It's a wishy-washy "simulation" of an HTTP header that
would be ignored if it were sent and which would in theory specify the
language of the intended audience (not of the document).

The solution suggested at
http://webxact2.watchfire.com/themes/standard-en-us/help/HIDD_WDContent_G1
25.html says
/"...The HTML element at the beginning of each page should
use the HTML 4.0 "lang" attribute..."/

Sloppy terminology. A page _is_ an HTML element. And it refers to HTML 4.0
for some odd reason. Bobby hasn't been much updated for years, I'm afraid.

But that's not valid in xhtml 1.1!

Why do you use XHTML 1.1? It's an exercise in futility and does not work on
the WWW (unless you questionably fake it to be text/html).

So, how do I make Bobby happy without going back to HTML 4.0?

Why would you want to make Bobby happy?

If you use HTML 4.01 (or HTML 4.0), you can use the lang attribute. You can
do that even in XHTML 1.0. And a few user agents will actually make some use
of the lang attribute.

In XHTML 1.1, that attribute has been replaced by xml:lang attribute. It has
less support in user agents than the lang attribute.

 

[Chaddy2222]

Hi!
I'm trying to validate my page http://tinyurl.com/8ukw6
with Bobby at http://webxact.watchfire.com/

For starters. Bobby is only an accessibility checker and so will only
look for issues concerning accessability. These include issues such as
the way a Screen Reader interprets your web page.

Validation for "W3C WCAG P3" fails because of /"Guideline
4.3: Identify the language of the text."/
Yet the head contains the tag
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="it" />

Well. You should use the proper validator http://validator.w3.org that
will validate your code.

The solution suggested at
http://webxact2.watchfire.com/themes/standard-en-us/help/HIDD_WDContent_G125.html
says
/"...The HTML element at the beginning of each page should
use the HTML 4.0 "lang" attribute..."/

Ahhh. I think they mean a Doc Type Decleration. and yes you should use
one. Make it xhtml1.0 if you want to use xhtml.

But that's not valid in xhtml 1.1!

Yeah. Cause that is a different DTD!.
Do some Googleing on both Accessibility and DTD's. That might give you
a better understanding on what it's all about.

So, how do I make Bobby happy without going back to HTML 4.0?

Thanks a lot!

See above.

 

[.:|:.]

Hi!
I'm trying to validate...

Thanks everybody for the useful info!

..:|:.

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

I think they mean a Doc Type Decleration.

No they don't. A document type declaration has nothing to do with the
language used in a document's content.