XHTML 1.1 strict validation of <THEAD> and <TFOOT>

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Woolly Mittens, Dec 31, 2003.

  1. Woolly Mittens, Dec 31, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Woolly Mittens

    Steve Pugh Guest

    "Woolly Mittens" <> wrote:

    >I tried validating my gallery page using the w3c validator.
    >http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.woollymittens.nl/content/gallery/index.asp
    >
    >To my surprise it informed me that <tfoot> wasn't valid XHTML 1.1 strict,
    >while it is in the document definition:
    >http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_tablemodule
    >
    >My <thead> tag apparently was valid, while my <tfoot> wasn't.


    tfoot must come _before_ tbody, not after it. This causes problems
    with browsers that don't support tfoot properly as they will display
    the contents of the footer before the body.

    So either have a valid page which may cause problems in older browsers
    or an invalid page which may cause problems in browsers that apply the
    standards exactly. Not using tfoot at all may be the best compromise.

    BTW, there is no XHTML 1.1 strict. XHTML 1.1 exists in only one
    version. The restriction on where tfoot can go is in all versions of
    (x)html that include tfoot.

    Steve

    --
    "My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
    I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

    Steve Pugh <> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
     
    Steve Pugh, Dec 31, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Woolly Mittens

    SteW Guest

    Woolly Mittens wrote:
    > I tried validating my gallery page using the w3c validator.
    > http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.woollymittens.nl/content/gallery/index.asp
    >
    > To my surprise it informed me that <tfoot> wasn't valid XHTML 1.1 strict,
    > while it is in the document definition:
    > http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_tablemodule
    >
    > My <thead> tag apparently was valid, while my <tfoot> wasn't.
    >
    > I would appreciate it if anyone could clarify the matter.
    >
    > Greetings,
    > Maurice van Creij
    >
    >


    "TFOOT must appear before TBODY within a TABLE definition so that user
    agents can render the foot before receiving all of the (potentially
    numerous) rows of data."

    http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/tables.html#h-11.2.3

    Ste W
     
    SteW, Dec 31, 2003
    #3
  4. Woolly Mittens

    brucie Guest

    brucie, Dec 31, 2003
    #4
  5. Thanks for the replies everybody.

    But I still think it's odd to put the footer before the body.
    Wouldn't that mess up the reading order in text-browsers?
     
    Woolly Mittens, Jan 1, 2004
    #5
  6. "brucie" <> wrote in message
    news:bsvitc$1qjf2$-berlin.de...
    > Crosspost, don't multipost


    The world would be a better place if you would answer questions, instead of
    playing netiquette police with a holier than thou attitude.
     
    Woolly Mittens, Jan 1, 2004
    #6
  7. Woolly Mittens

    brucie Guest

    in post <news:3ff3dcb7$0$16870$>
    Woolly Mittens said:

    >> Crosspost, don't multipost


    > The world would be a better place if you would answer questions,


    how do people know the question hasn't already been answered in another
    group and they would just be wasting their time repeating what someone
    else has already said?

    > instead of playing netiquette police


    you'll never learn if you're never told

    --
    brucie
    01/January/2004 07:07:12 pm kilo
     
    brucie, Jan 1, 2004
    #7
  8. Woolly Mittens wrote:

    > But I still think it's odd to put the footer before the body.


    Yeah, it is odd, but that's how it's done.

    > Wouldn't that mess up the reading order in text-browsers?


    Yep -- but many text browsers don't understand tables anyway.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132
     
    Toby A Inkster, Jan 1, 2004
    #8
  9. Woolly Mittens wrote:

    > The world would be a better place if you would answer questions, instead of
    > playing netiquette police with a holier than thou attitude.


    But if you multipost it means that different people will answer you in
    different newsgroups, thereby creating extra work for those people kind
    enough to answer your questions. Multiposting is plain inconsiderate.
    Crosspost instead.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132
     
    Toby A Inkster, Jan 1, 2004
    #9
  10. Woolly Mittens wrote:

    > But I still think it's odd to put the footer before the body.
    > Wouldn't that mess up the reading order in text-browsers?


    Only if the text browser doesn't understand HTML 4 or newer.

    --
    David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>
     
    David Dorward, Jan 1, 2004
    #10
  11. "Toby A Inkster" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > Woolly Mittens wrote:
    >
    > > The world would be a better place if you would answer questions, instead

    of
    > > playing netiquette police with a holier than thou attitude.

    >
    > But if you multipost it means that different people will answer you in
    > different newsgroups, thereby creating extra work for those people kind
    > enough to answer your questions. Multiposting is plain inconsiderate.
    > Crosspost instead.
    >


    I'm sure your reason is valid. But if you don't answer my question, you have
    no business policing me.
     
    Woolly Mittens, Jan 2, 2004
    #11
  12. Woolly Mittens wrote:
    > "Toby A Inkster" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> Woolly Mittens wrote:
    >>
    >>> The world would be a better place if you would answer questions,
    >>> instead of playing netiquette police with a holier than thou
    >>> attitude.

    >>
    >> But if you multipost it means that different people will answer you
    >> in different newsgroups, thereby creating extra work for those
    >> people kind enough to answer your questions. Multiposting is plain
    >> inconsiderate. Crosspost instead.

    >
    > I'm sure your reason is valid. But if you don't answer my question,
    > you have no business policing me.


    I for one am grateful when a multi-post is identified. It means that the
    issue has likely been addressed elsewhere and there is little point in me
    expending any effort on it.

    Is that clearer?

    --
    William Tasso - http://WilliamTasso.com
     
    William Tasso, Jan 2, 2004
    #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. bernhard
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    5,402
    bernhard
    Aug 17, 2006
  2. shapper

    TFoot

    shapper, Nov 15, 2007, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    331
    shapper
    Nov 16, 2007
  3. TonyV
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    2,009
    dorayme
    Jan 10, 2008
  4. DavidC

    Populate tfoot in ListView

    DavidC, Jan 14, 2010, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    716
    DavidC
    Jan 14, 2010
  5. Robert Smith

    XHTML Strict and Javascript Form Validation

    Robert Smith, Nov 30, 2004, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    171
    Robert Smith
    Dec 1, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page