|
| |||||||
| HTML Forum HTML Forum. HTML Programming questions and answers here. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
02-16-2005, 03:16 AM
| |||
| |||
| valid html and css
When I validate my css at http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator, I can get "No error or warning found" but i am a bit puzzled by what the words following mean: "To work as intended, your CSS style sheet needs a correct document parse tree. This means you should use valid HTML." The css? This is not html? As for the html files that the css control, of course they should be valid...? My css sheets are pretty plain getting straight down to business with the tags: body { } and so on. Should there be further headers and footers (in html there's <head> and <body> and <html> and meta tags and stuff. My sheets seem to work ok but need to get this really right... Anyone? dorayme  |
|
02-16-2005, 05:31 AM
| |||
| |||
| valid html and css
Kermit the Frog stuck a mic in dorayme's face, who said: Don't sweat it. The CSS validator looks at your CSS file, and nothing else. It has no idea which html documents on the world wide webby are linking to it, but it still gives a friendly reminder to keep the html docs in good shape. -- - Steve "I think a good friend would recommend CLR to all his friends." |
|
02-17-2005, 12:10 AM
| |||
| |||
| valid html and css
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:16:07 +1100 dorayme wrote: What they should say is, "To validate your html part use validator.w3.org." Intstead of the BS $10 words like "parse tree". If parse means to cut, then why would I want to cut down the tree? |
|
02-17-2005, 03:16 AM
| |||
| |||
| valid html and css
Richard wrote: Well, it's a moot point really because parse does not mean "to cut". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsing http://www.pcwebopedia.com/TERM/P/parse.htm http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=parse http://www.answers.com/parse&r=67 |
|
02-17-2005, 07:36 PM
| |||
| |||
| valid html and css
dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote: then you aren't really using a validator, but a (useful) checker, which is misleadingly called "CSS Validator". They mean that the authors of the checker wanted to make some general propaganda in favor of "valid HTML". It has nothing specific to do with your HTML or SGML or XML document, if any. It wouldn't hurt. Whether markup errors really matter depends on the browser. It is incorrect to give the impression that CSS could never work with invalid markup. Unfortunately most HTML documents around are invalid - but they may still work with CSS. So I guess you are using XML with "body" as the root element's name? Nothing wrong with that, as long as you know what you are doing with XML in the first place. If you play with XML and CSS, then there is no particular reason to imitate HTML syntax. Your XML needs to be "well-formed" in order to be processed properly at all. You could also make it valid, i.e. find or write a Document Type Definition, stick to it, and declare using it. But validity is by no means needed for making CSS work with CSS. Still less do you need to try to make your XML valid HTML (i.e., XHTML), unless you want to make your document work on HTML user agents, "browsers", in HTML mode (with default renderings for many elements, etc.). -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Is this valid coding? (PHP and HTML Meta)? | someone | PHP Forum | 0 | 09-17-2008 06:23 AM |
| Well, I'm almost valid but | Larry Webb | HTML Forum | 15 | 01-07-2005 08:24 PM |
| Is it valid? | Samuël van Laere | HTML Forum | 7 | 11-03-2003 12:37 PM |
| icons for valid css and html | tom watson | HTML Forum | 13 | 09-17-2003 09:56 AM |
| valid css? | tom watson | HTML Forum | 3 | 09-17-2003 01:10 AM |
Linear Mode
