Re: [WSG] Validation

At a guess, I'd say that the problem is caused by having your javascript in the head of your document, which makes the validator try to parse it (and so find 's in the head, where no 's should be). Simplest solution would be to move your javascript into an external file and just link it into the h

RE: [WSG] Validation

Fuji, It is because it is inline script, which the validator is trying to parse. Change this: Your script here ... to: /**/ (Note the additional two lines wrapping it) More info at: http://javascript.abo

[WSG] Validation

Can someone help me out with this validation? this is a javascript for my menu which is inside my html page. *Line 154, Column 39*: document type does not allow element "li" here. $back = $('*').appendTo ✉ The

Re: [WSG] W3C HTML Validation of an Intranet site

If you have the capacity, I advise installing your own local copy. Instructions are available from the W3C: http://validator.w3.org/docs/install.html There are similar instructions for the CSS validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/DOWNLOAD.html Thanks! Lachlan Hardy ***

Re: [WSG] W3C HTML Validation of an Intranet site

or get web developer toolbar for firefox and select Validate Local HTML from the Tools menu [Ctrl + Shift + A] Hayden's Harness Attachment wrote: I have an Intranet site I wish to put through the HTML validator. How do I validate the Internet site. Download and save the code? then upload the c

Re: [WSG] W3C HTML Validation of an Intranet site

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Hayden's Harness Attachment < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have an Intranet site I wish to put through the HTML validator. How do I > validate the Internet site. Download and save the code? then upload the code > to the HTML validator? > > Angus MacKinnon > Infofo

[WSG] W3C HTML Validation of an Intranet site

I have an Intranet site I wish to put through the HTML validator. How do I validate the Internet site. Download and save the code? then upload the code to the HTML validator? Angus MacKinnon Infoforce Services http://www.infoforce-services.com "Faith is the strength by which a shattered world s

Re: [WSG] html vs. html

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rob Enslin wrote: > >> I recently started noticing that our CMS system generated .htm pages where >> previously the system produced .html pages. I questioned the support staff >> and was told that the W3C deemed .html as

Re: [WSG] Firefox rendering issue

hi lynette, make sure fire fox sees it correctly, then make corrections for ie. hth, dwain On 6/18/08, Lynette Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://www.americanmotorcycles.com.au/spyder.html > > IE displays as intended but since I made some changes to other parts of the > site, Firefox di

[WSG] Firefox rendering issue

http://www.americanmotorcycles.com.au/spyder.html IE displays as intended but since I made some changes to other parts of the site, Firefox displays incorrectly. It seems to want to put #contentdata directly under #box instead of under #contentpics. Can anyone see where I have gone wron

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3

all I have to do is create had to do was create a new profile and set shortcuts to load ff3 with the new profile. heres some info http://blog.codefront.net/2007/08/20/how-to-have-firefox-3-and-firefox-2-running-at-the-same-time/ 2008/6/18 Sajan Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > It will replace the v

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3

It will replace the version 2 with the new one, and many of the plugins that works on version 2 gets disable since they aren't compatible. I did a mistake updating. Sajan On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2008/06/18 13:17 (GMT+0100) Paul Collins appare

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Firebug (1.20b3 seems stable) and web developer toolbar both are now compatible with FF3. Make sure you get the versions from the Mozilla Add-ons pages as these are currently the most up to date. On a PC if you need to run both FF3and FF2 you can run the portable versions of either of them fro

Re: [WSG] html vs. html

Rob Enslin wrote: I recently started noticing that our CMS system generated .htm pages where previously the system produced .html pages. I questioned the support staff and was told that the W3C deemed .html as non-standard file extensions (or rather .htm were more-widely accepted as the standa

Re: [WSG] Duplicate Messages? Help!

Thanks so much for your accurate answer! :-) Gregorio Espadas http://espadas.com.mx On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:09 PM, James Jeffery < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I believe one of the messages gets sent back to yourself and the other is > sent out to everyone one the list. > > In GMail it will g

Re: [WSG] Duplicate Messages? Help!

I believe one of the messages gets sent back to yourself and the other is sent out to everyone one the list. In GMail it will group the emails, so you are infact getting 2, but this is normal. James On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Gregorio Espadas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi. I realize tha

Re: [WSG] html vs. html

Alternative to serving XHTML pages via Content Negotiation, I associate (via .htaccess) the .htm file extension with HTML & XHTML pages served as content MIME type text/html and the .html file extension for XHTML pages served as content MIME type application/xhtml+xml. James Semantic Web Page

Re: [WSG] html vs. html

the standard is html On Jun 18, 2008, at 17:31, Ian Chamberlain wrote: The W3C's own site is full of four letter suffixs Rob. not that that means anything. I would doubt what they are saying, but then where I came from CMS and web standards were on different planets. - Original

[WSG] Duplicate Messages? Help!

Hi. I realize that every time I send a message to WSG, I get two copies of that message in my Gmail Inbox. Does it just me? A bug of Gmail? Thanks in advance for the help. Also, I hope this message doesn't botter to the members of this excellent group. Gregorio Espadas http://espadas.com.mx **

Re: [WSG] html vs. html

I think the same. Ergo, I always prefered .html over .htm Gregorio Espadas http://espadas.com.mx On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Svip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If W3C says so, I cannot see why at all. Who said a file extension > should be 3 characters long? Microsoft!? Hah, don't make

Re: [WSG] html vs. html

If W3C says so, I cannot see why at all. Who said a file extension should be 3 characters long? Microsoft!? Hah, don't make me laugh, just because they thought people wouldn't be able to have filenames longer than 8 characters and 3 characters for file extensions (known as the 8.3 system). Peop

Re: [WSG] html vs. html

The W3C's own site is full of four letter suffixs Rob. not that that means anything. I would doubt what they are saying, but then where I came from CMS and web standards were on different planets. - Original Message - From: Rob Enslin To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Wedn

[WSG] html vs. html

Hi peeps, I recently started noticing that our CMS system generated .htm pages where previously the system produced .html pages. I questioned the support staff and was told that the W3C deemed .html as non-standard file extensions (or rather .htm were more-widely accepted as the standard) Is this

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Got it Cortney thanks! Great little addon it is too. Kate - Original Message - From: "Cortney Sellers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 3:59 PM Subject: RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate Nope - I have firebug n FF 2 and am on a PC (I also have a slew of other awesom

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

firebug 1.2 works fine on FF3 and is available from the add-ons on the mozilla site: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1843 Stew 2008/6/18 Ken Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Quoting kate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Ken, >> Its said this am that there is a problem and so no Firebug f

Re: [WSG] HTML special characters coding

On Thu, June 19, 2008 12:40 am, T. R. Valentine wrote: > Yes, Patrick is correct. > > I would add one caveat. If you use UTF-8 (personally, I see no reason > to anything else), you should not use ASCII characters (hex) 81-9F / > (dec) 129-159 which includes stuff like &151; for an em dash and

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Quoting kate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Ken, Its said this am that there is a problem and so no Firebug for my FF3 at least. This was at the Mozilla site. [snip] Firebug is available for FF3 at the normal FF addons area. I just went to the ab

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

I've downloaded Firebug 1.1 Beta and it seems to work fine with Firefox 3 http://getfirebug.com/releases/ Hope that helps. - - - - - http://www.dave-woods.co.uk 2008/6/18 kate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I hear about so many goodies on my lists I tried to dl Firebug (if our > people like it its g

RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Nope - I have firebug n FF 2 and am on a PC (I also have a slew of other awesome extensions too) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kate Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 9:52 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidat

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Got it now thanksFirebug Kate - Original Message - From: "Ken Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:50 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate Quoting Jason Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Can some kind person tell me.. ..is Firebug only for the Mac as I have a PC. Thanks Kate - Original Message - From: "russ - maxdesign" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Web Standards Group" Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:47 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate Maybe a mac thing but I h

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Ken, Its said this am that there is a problem and so no Firebug for my FF3 at least. This was at the Mozilla site. Kate - Original Message - From: "Ken Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:50 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate Quoting Jason Gran

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

I hear about so many goodies on my lists I tried to dl Firebug (if our people like it its got to be awesome...hahaahah) But FF said it had a problem and would not allow in FF3. Glad you mentioned Firebug Jason - thanks! Kate - Original Message - From: Jason Grant To: wsg@webstanda

Re: [WSG] HTML special characters coding

On 18/06/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can others with experience with this please confirm (or not) what Patrick has > said? > Thanks. Yes, Patrick is correct. I would add one caveat. If you use UTF-8 (personally, I see no reason to anything else), you should not use ASCI

Re: [WSG] Multi level navigation!

Thanks allot guys, missed it again. Cheers Darren Lovelock wrote: Hi James, The sub UL should have an wrapping it, that will make it validate. Like this: Home About Us How to choose

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Just check for Firebug at the Mozilla FF Add-On website, there´s a new version compatible with the FF3. Regards, Léo Siqueira [EMAIL PROTECTED] (19) 9111-2239 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm U

RE: [WSG] HTML special characters coding

Yes Patrick is correct. But that is the same with any character encoing, everything needs to match up. Different scripting modules throw in their own quirks into the mix. How easy it is, or how complex it is depends on how many languages and how many writing scripts you need to support. The m

RE: [WSG] Multi level navigation!

Hi James, The sub UL should have an wrapping it, that will make it validate. Like this: Home About Us How to choose Step 1: Front Cover Step 2: Typ

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Jason Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-( > Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work with. > FF3 is very nice and I am excited. > Just can't wait for FireBug to become

RE: [WSG] Multi level navigation!

Hi, It is not valid because the inner needs to be contained in a item of the outer . The only valid thing inside a tag is a . If you surround the inner with a with a class/id attached then you should be able to fiddle with that specific in your CSS to sort out paddings/margins as your requir

Re: [WSG] Multi level navigation!

I woulkd try to nmake it in DL DT DD and easier make levels. Ir not use the inside UL but add a class to the Step 1: Front Cover That would validated the menu even strict james wrote: Hi, Just wondering if any one can help me, i am trying to make a multi level CSS list on my website for na

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

James Ellis wrote: you can run either version from the relevant file location, but not at the same time. You can run any number of versions at the same time, but you have to use separate profiles - the profile can only be active in one instance at a time. You have to use the -no-remote comm

RE: [WSG] HTML special characters coding

Can others with experience with this please confirm (or not) what Patrick has said? Thanks. Kevin --- Original Message --- From:Patrick Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent:Wed 6/18/08 6:10 am To:wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subj:RE: [WSG] HTML special characters coding > Rick Lecoat > So let me see i

[WSG] Multi level navigation!

Hi, Just wondering if any one can help me, i am trying to make a multi level CSS list on my website for navigation, it looks fine and works fine in all browsers, however it is now valid XHTML. The navigation can be seen here; http://jungle-systems.com/~mip/fmn/ I have tried adding a new cla

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Hi That's not exactly right .. if you install v3 to a different location (tip: choose Custom install) then you can run either version from the relevant file location, but not at the same time. The only problem you will find is compatibility with some extensions when you run FF3. If you want to

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

definitely a mac thing, not sharing libraries like windows dll hell... On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 2:47 PM, russ - maxdesign <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe a mac thing but I have have a variety of FF versions (as well as Moz, > Opera, Safari, IE and Netscape versions) going back in time on one lap

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Firebug 1.1 works fine on firefox3. Jason Grant wrote: It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-( Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work with. FF3 is very nice and I am excited. Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Quoting Jason Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-( Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work with. FF3 is very nice and I am excited. Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so cruci

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Here’s a good solution (it works on my pc) to keep both Firefox 2 and 3 : " Multiple Firefox Profiles: Run Firefox 2 and 3 Side-By-Side, and More" Best regards, Roberto Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Per conto

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Maybe a mac thing but I have have a variety of FF versions (as well as Moz, Opera, Safari, IE and Netscape versions) going back in time on one laptop and can open any as needed. The only limitation I've noticed with Moz related browsers is that you can only open one at a time. on 18/6/08 10:17 PM

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

if you have a mac you can rename it firefox3 so you can run it side by side, but your extensions might get confused... On Jun 18, 2008, at 13:17, Paul Collins wrote: Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will it run side by side?! Cheers *

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3

On 2008/06/18 13:17 (GMT+0100) Paul Collins apparently typed: > Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will > it run side by side?! It doesn't have to. There are instructions on the mozilla.org developer pages for running as many concurrent versions of Gecko products as

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Paul, When you start the installation you need to make the Custom setup and change the install directory, but you will need to create a new shortcut for the old version of FF. Regards, Léo 2008/6/18 Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

it will replace your version of Firefox. But you can now get the official release of FF3! Jonathan On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will > it run side by side?! > > Cheers > > > *

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

It will replace it, unless you "backup" your Firefox 2 client and move it somewhere where Firefox 3 cannot get to it. /Svip 2008/6/18 Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will > it run side by side?! > > Cheers > > > ***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-( Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work with. FF3 is very nice and I am excited. Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so crucial for us of course. Regards, Jason www.fl

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

It will replace, probably portable firefox2 an option to use both. Sundar On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will > it run side by side?! > > Cheers > > > ***

[WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will it run side by side?! Cheers *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm

RE: [WSG] HTML special characters coding

> Rick Lecoat > So let me see if I have this right: as long as my page declares an > encoding (I use UTF-8) I don't need to encode the entities, I > can just > type them straight into the markup. Is that correct? Make sure that your whole environment is UTF-8 (your code editor, any database

Re: [WSG] HTML special characters coding

On 17 Jun 2008, at 23:46, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Beyond the inbuilt entities I tend to just use the characters directly in the markup and specify UTF-8 encoding. Has been working reasonably well in all modern browsers. On 18 Jun 2008, at 00:19, Andrew Cunningham wrote: Use &   < and > Al

[WSG] Re: Multiple Language Domains

Hi Jay, Sorry I meant that our system is currently putting the xml statement before the doctype and so causing the quirks mode problem, and we cant figure out why as it is not doing it on all pages. We were aware of this problem and its on my fix list in fact i am working on it now :) Would

RE: [WSG] User testing results to reinforce 'no popup' recommendation [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Brad, I don't have any test data that shows this, however, below are a two articles from Digital Web Magazine that mention the topic. I'm also fairly sure that AGIMO has some research on the topic but I couldn't find it this afternoon. You could also check out the Vision Australia website (http: