Re: Why is my home page not valid XHTML? - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View

Re: Why is my home page not valid XHTML?

and have decided to lend my vast knowledge.

The writer said:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

and my reply is:
Strange. It works in IE 5.1 on a Mac. Try my home page.

Dennis M. Marks /
Replace domain.invalid with

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Re: Why is my home page not valid XHTML?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

This statement about "clueless" content also needs re-evaluating. I
would distinguish 3 levels of usage:

1) To embed content that UAs don't handle natively.
2) To embed content that UAs do commonly handle.
3) To embed text/html content.

For instances of (1) usage of the object method may be unwise, due to
the current buggy implementation of <object> in UAs alternative content
is likely not to be presented to the user. It's essential that it does
since the chance of a embedding failure is quite high.

The chance of an embedding failure with type (2) usage is less likely as
the type of object that is to be embedded is natively supported by the
UA. When for example embedding an image there's still the risk of for
example image display being switched off in the UA, requiring the
element's content to be displayed, which again due to the buggy
implementation in UAs may not happen.

However if as the OP did you are embedding text/html (type 3), then
there's *in principle* no point in specifying alternate content. It may
however still be useful to do that, due to UAs buggy implementation of
<object> a situation could occur where the embedding fails despite the
fact that the text/html content type is inherently supported by the UA,
or perhaps a UA does not support <object>, in such a case alt content
would be useful.


Re: Why is my home page not valid XHTML?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Unless there's CSS that sets a height and width for #commentframe. Of
course relying on having CSS styles applied in order to make content
available is a flawed idea so the HTML width and height attributes
should be used instead/as well.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I think Jukka's point was that any clueful content would have included
a link to comments.html at the very minimum, regardless of the
situations in which that content might be used. Users have to be able
to get to comments.html one way or another - unless that fundamental
is covered, everything else is rather pointless.


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

Site Timeline