Question about xHTML validation...

[Ohiosweetheart]

How closely are you coders paying attention to xhtml validation?

The reason I ask is, vB is xHTML compliant pretty much right out of the box. I checked my test forum yesterday, and it is compliant. However, as soon as I added a side column to it, there were numerous errors, so I took it off, and it passed validation. Then I added another mod to see what would happen, and it failed validation.

Now, I never paid attention to xhtml validation in the past. This is a very recent thing for me. But now that I'm into it, I can't let go of it, lol.

So I ask again - how many of you are concerned with xhtml compliance? Do you try to get your code to validate?

Same question to the designers - are you concerned with xhtml compliance and do you try to get your skins/styles to validate?

[Boofo]

"vB is xHTML compliant pretty much right out of the box" is wrong, sorry to say. I have reported a few of them lately and they have been fixed for the upcoming RC2. Granted, it is only a few of them, but there are a few that they had to work around to do. I have been testing my hacks lately for validation, so they will be up to snuff soon.

[Ohiosweetheart]

THANK YOU Boofo! I wondered if anyone would challenge that statement. I said on another forum that vB does not always validate out of the box and was told I was wrong.

It doesn't, you're right. I've had 2 installation that didn't validate - and that was before I did anything at all to them, simply installed them.

Glad to know that you're working on your hacks.

Sorry to say that most of my styles don't validate. I've always been an old hat html user, and didn't care much about xhtml til now. Hopefully my future designs will validate.

[Boofo]

The validation bug is catching. I am bound and determined to have my site 100% validated. So far I am on track. With the release of RC2, that will fix the search area. Now all I have to do is rip the postbit apart as I have heavily modded it and have got quite a few errors in it.

[Ohiosweetheart]

Same here. My forum is horrible as is my homepage. I'm working on my forum, one error at a time. I get confused as to where to find the errors tho - row 289, column 7?? There has to be an easier way.

Right now I'm using Wordpress for a homepage, but am changing to Joomla, which is xhtml compliant, and I'm taking my time setting it up, determined to keep it that way!

[Boofo]

If you get joomla working, let me know as I want to get it installed, too. What's great about validation is it can say you have 75 errors (for example) and 1 correction can clear up quite a few of those errors. My homepage is validated as well as most of the site now.

When you validate a page, click the Show Source box and it will make a link with the line number so you can look at the error.

[Ohiosweetheart]

Oh Joomla works great! I'm just having a hard time learning it.

Wordpress is SO much easier, yet Joomla has so many more features, and validates away. Plus Joomla requires that anyone designing a template for their product must validate. However they don't require the same for anyone coding an add-on. Strange but true. I had to remove 2 of their add-ons because they threw my validation off.

grrrrrrrrrr...

[Boofo]

Do you have Joomla up and running? I'd like to check it out if you do.

Validating add-ons is easier than you think. A lot if it is simple syntax type errors.

[Ohiosweetheart]

Sorry for the delay, these pain pills knock me out.
Yep I do have it up and running. Look for a pm.

[Boofo]

Was it hard to get it to that point?

[Ohiosweetheart]

uh yeah. lol I installed it through the Fantastico in my cPanel. That was easy enough. Customizing it is a whole nuther story. To me, Joomla is difficult to master. Perhaps I'm just getting old. There are sections, and categories have to go in sections, then there's modules that have to go in the categories that go in the sections, and then there's lists, and menus - I'm too old for this stuff.

The template you see there is just the default template. Pretty attractive, eh? I'm going to try a free one that I like and see what happens.

[Boofo]

Well, when you get the setup you like let me know and we can see if we can do it again. ;)

[Ohiosweetheart]

LOL will do! And to think... that setup validates!

[Jase2]

I've used Joomla, but over the coming months I'll be purchasing ContentTeller then completely redesigning it. I think Joomla is pretty easy, and is very flexible.

Boofo, if you want to see some sites with Joomla up and running, visit the Joomla forums, since they have a showcase forum ;)

Regards Jason :)

[Ohiosweetheart]

Thanks for your input Jason. That url would be www.joomla.org (http://www.joomla.org), Boofo.

Joomla is very flexible, but couldn't agree on the "easy" :(

[Boofo]

Already been there. ;)

Jason, you were supposed to get ahold of me when you installed Joomla.

[Ohiosweetheart]

oooooooooooooooooops lol

[cheat-master30]

I always try to pay attention to XHTML validation, and the vast majority of minor modifications I end up creating are XHTML 1.0 Transitional valid (except the old AOL video one). I also end up having to fix a ton of modifications installed which seem like the authors don't care less about validation, and their updates often say to revert templates when the only difference is my last edited version is valid and their most modern version isn't...

[Jase2]

Thanks for your input Jason. That url would be www.joomla.org (http://www.joomla.org), Boofo.

Joomla is very flexible, but couldn't agree on the "easy" :(

Once you've used it for a while, you will find it very easy ;)


Already been there. ;)

Jason, you were supposed to get ahold of me when you installed Joomla.

Yes, I was thinking of installing Joomla then completely redesigning it, however I am now going with ContentTeller.

What is it you wish to do with Joomla, Boofo? Are you having trouble installing, integrating, it ect.?

Anyway, my main focus is Shift Linux -- just joined the dev team :D

Regards Jason :)

[SEOvB]

everyone should try to make their forums as compiant as possible. Spiders love compliant code and not only that, but theres tons of other benefits to having compliant code.

If you run adsense, their spider delivers better ads, for better coded sites :D

[Adrian Schneider]

I always go for compliance.

You can save yourself some work if you install Web Developer toolbar for Firefox, so you can right click > submenu > validate local HTML (as you see it).

If you write HTML very clearly (indent properly, use whitespace to help readability), then 90% of your errors you'll catch before even saving. For more complex fixings, you can create a barebones page, and then paste your template into it to test it independently.

Some editors also show tag pairings (I use Eclipse) so when I click on an opening tag, it will highlight the closing tag assuming some validity in the code. Compare this with indentation, and you can quickly find incorrectly nested tags.

Once you get really proficient with CSS, the markup becomes so simple validation is rarely an issue. It's all the nested tables that can make it tricky.

[Ohiosweetheart]

"vB is xHTML compliant pretty much right out of the box" is wrong, sorry to say. I have reported a few of them lately and they have been fixed for the upcoming RC2. Granted, it is only a few of them, but there are a few that they had to work around to do. I have been testing my hacks lately for validation, so they will be up to snuff soon.

Boofo, does this tag happen to be something that you mentioned and is being fixed for RC 2?
</optgroup>I do hope so, because it's giving me a fit on almost every page. And I didn't change any code, this is default vB code.

Validation Output: 1 Error

https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/external/2010/10/16.png Line 550, Column 12: end tag for "optgroup" which is not finished. </optgroup>
Most likely, you nested tags and closed them in the wrong order. For example <p><em>...</p> is not acceptable, as <em> must be closed before <p>. Acceptable nesting is: <p><em>...</em></p>
Another possibility is that you used an element which requires a child element that you did not include. Hence the parent element is "not finished", not complete. For instance, in HTML the <head> element must contain a <title> child element, lists (ul, ol, dl) require list items (li, or dt, dd), and so on.grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....

[Boofo]

I have never gotten that error.

[Ohiosweetheart]

When I go to forumdisplay and showthread, that's when I get it.

[Jase2]

I don't get that error either. Are you sure it's not an hack?

Regards Jason :)

[Boofo]

It has to be a hack or an edit someone did.

[Ohiosweetheart]

Nope, I'm getting this on my test forum, on the default style. I have no hacks on the board, no edits have been made.

[Boofo]

No way that can be, Peggy. Something had changed somewhere. Make sure all closing tags are there.

[Jase2]

I'm running the default and I'm not getting this. Try reverting your templates.

Regards Jason :)

[Ohiosweetheart]

Whether you think it can be or not, I'm telling you, it IS. Look at my screenies below.

This is a fresh upgrade to 3.7 RC1 (this morning in fact). This is the default style, no hacks added, no template edits, no nothing. Look at my forum home. IT validates.

Now look at the screenie of forum display, then look at the validator. Look at my screenie of showthread, again look at the validator. I know what I'm talking about ;)

[Boofo]

Ok, I digress. I'm smart enough not to argue with a woman. Bad vb, bad vb! ;)

[Jase2]

Like Boofo says, no arguing there :p

But, in all honesty, I do not get that error.

Regards Jason :)

[Ohiosweetheart]

me either. I think it has something to do with the social groups?
No idea. BUT, I did find each and every instance of </optgroup>

in both templates, and changed it to <optgroup />and it didn't help. In fact the validator still showed it as </optgroup> when I know I changed them all.


Could the validator be mistaken? HEY stranger things have happened.

[Jase2]

Have you tried reporting it in the "Bug Tracker"? I suggest you do. ;)

Regards Jason :)

[Ohiosweetheart]

Thanks Jase, I am going to, right after I watch one of my favorite shows, Paranormal State :p

[Boofo]

Peggy, let me take a look at it for you. there has to be a reason it is doing that for you. PM me the links for it and I will check it out.

[SEOvB]

me either. I think it has something to do with the social groups?
No idea. BUT, I did find each and every instance of </optgroup>

in both templates, and changed it to <optgroup />and it didn't help. In fact the validator still showed it as </optgroup> when I know I changed them all.


Could the validator be mistaken? HEY stranger things have happened.

this is completely off topic and won't help with your problem, But whenever i've been making changes to my templates here lately, its taken like 5-6 hard refreshes of the page to get them to update for some reason :sad:

[Boofo]

Yes, the cache. I almost forgot.

[Ohiosweetheart]

this is completely off topic and won't help with your problem, But whenever i've been making changes to my templates here lately, its taken like 5-6 hard refreshes of the page to get them to update for some reason :sad:FRDS, I've been noticing the same thing with the new vb theme that I'm working on! I'm glad it's not just me. But yeah I'll upload the image, and have to hard refresh 4 or more times before I see the change. I've not had that happen in previous versions, that I can remember.

Thanks for bringing that up.

[Boofo]

Believe it or not, I haven't run into that yet. Maybe vb is out to get the both of you? ;)

[Ohiosweetheart]

I always go for compliance.

You can save yourself some work if you install Web Developer toolbar for Firefox, so you can right click > submenu > validate local HTML (as you see it).

If you write HTML very clearly (indent properly, use whitespace to help readability), then 90% of your errors you'll catch before even saving. For more complex fixings, you can create a barebones page, and then paste your template into it to test it independently.

Some editors also show tag pairings (I use Eclipse) so when I click on an opening tag, it will highlight the closing tag assuming some validity in the code. Compare this with indentation, and you can quickly find incorrectly nested tags.


Once you get really proficient with CSS, the markup becomes so simple validation is rarely an issue. It's all the nested tables that can make it tricky.

Indeed Adrian. I have only your spam mod and 2 others installed on my designs site and yours is the only one that doesn't throw out validation errors.

I did know about this Web developer toolbar, something I will look into. Thank you.



Believe it or not, I haven't run into that yet. Maybe vb is out to get the both of you? ;)
haha I'm a believer, on both counts!!