Advanced search  

News:

cpg1.5.48 Security release - upgrade mandatory!
The Coppermine development team is releasing a security update for Coppermine in order to counter a recently discovered vulnerability. It is important that all users who run version cpg1.5.46 or older update to this latest version as soon as possible.
[more]

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: [Solved]: [Invalid]: w3c validation  (Read 10526 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
[Solved]: [Invalid]: w3c validation
« on: January 02, 2010, 06:35:39 pm »

gallery is http://www.durangodaves.com/ddfotoup/index.php

hi i got it all to validate other than these three items and i checked the original and its the same..
any idea how to get it to validate with these three items..


Validation Output: 3 Errors
 Line 2, Column 73: character "{" is not allowed in the value of attribute "dir"
…g/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en" dir="{LANG_DIR}">
It is possible that you violated the naming convention for this attribute. For example, id and name attributes must begin with a letter, not a digit.

 Line 2, Column 83: value of attribute "dir" cannot be "{LANG_DIR}"; must be one of "ltr", "rtl"
…:lang="en" lang="en" dir="{LANG_DIR}">
The value of the attribute is defined to be one of a list of possible values but in the document it contained something that is not allowed for that type of attribute. For instance, the “selected” attribute must be either minimized as “selected” or spelled out in full as “selected="selected"”; a value like “selected="true"” is not allowed.

 Line 7, Column 1: character data is not allowed here
{META}
You have used character data somewhere it is not permitted to appear. Mistakes that can cause this error include:

•putting text directly in the body of the document without wrapping it in a container element (such as a <p>aragraph</p>), or
•forgetting to quote an attribute value (where characters such as "%" and "/" are common, but cannot appear without surrounding quotes), or
•using XHTML-style self-closing tags (such as <meta ... />) in HTML 4.01 or earlier. To fix, remove the extra slash ('/') character. For more information about the reasons for this, see Empty elements in SGML, HTML, XML, and XHTML.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2010, 04:19:17 pm by Joachim Müller »
Logged

Nibbler

  • Guest
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #1 on: January 02, 2010, 06:39:14 pm »

Looks like you are attempting to validate the template.html directly. You should be validating the actual output.

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.durangodaves.com%2Fddfotoup%2Findex.php
Logged

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #2 on: January 02, 2010, 07:01:19 pm »

lol yes i know bud, i thought i would do the index first to clean up some stuff,  the old addage how do you eat an elephant, one bite at a time lol ...

the other reason is that im getting a crap load of these from the private messaging in the validation,


…ef="index.php?file=cpg_pms/pms_send&id=1"><img src="themes/fruity/images/pm.g

i know its because i need to put &amp; instead of just & but not sure where the code is
and not sure where to fix that at, i got an idea and im running some tests to see if i can get the 36 errors to come down to 35 that way i will know im on the right track, but im also hoping that whoever wrote that private message script would be kind enough one day to write a w3c compliant version lol... wishfull thinking i know...

any ideas where to start, im thinking handling the &amp;  would be a good start... can you point me in the right direction..
i think its in the pms_send.php but not sure..
Logged

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #3 on: January 02, 2010, 07:13:58 pm »

i think i found it in the pms inc file
Logged

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #4 on: January 02, 2010, 07:27:46 pm »

whooo hooo, ok got it im down to three for the site, it was in the init.inc.php i just changed the define from

Code: [Select]
define('PM_LINK', 'index.php?file=cpg_pms/pms_send&id=');
to
Code: [Select]
define('PM_LINK', 'index.php?file=cpg_pms/pms_send&amp;id=');
 all that is left is these three of which i have no clue where the java is comming from, could be anyplace..  and im thinking i just have to put type= "data" to solve that part..


 Line 7, Column 30: required attribute "type" not specified
<script language="javascript">AC_FL_RunContent = 0;</script><script src="plugins
The attribute given above is required for an element that you've used, but you have omitted it. For instance, in most HTML and XHTML document types the "type" attribute is required on the "script" element and the "alt" attribute is required for the "img" element.

Typical values for type are type="text/css" for <style> and type="text/javascript" for <script>.
 Line 7, Column 135: required attribute "type" not specified
…iveContent.js" language="javascript"></script>
The attribute given above is required for an element that you've used, but you have omitted it. For instance, in most HTML and XHTML document types the "type" attribute is required on the "script" element and the "alt" attribute is required for the "img" element.

Typical values for type are type="text/css" for <style> and type="text/javascript" for <script>.
 Line 108, Column 30: required attribute "type" not specified
<script language="javascript">
The attribute given above is required for an element that you've used, but you have omitted it. For instance, in most HTML and XHTML document types the "type" attribute is required on the "script" element and the "alt" attribute is required for the "img" element.

Typical values for type are type="text/css" for <style> and type="text/javascript" for <script>.


Logged

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2010, 08:05:34 pm »

i hope you dont mind im gonna post the fix for the type validation error for javascript, one at a time as i find them, its easier, here is the first one

in iscroll.codebase.php

Code: [Select]
$html = '<script language="javascript">AC_FL_RunContent = 0;</script><script src="plugins/iscroll/AC_RunActiveContent.js" language="javascript"></script>'

change to

Code: [Select]
$html = '<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">AC_FL_RunContent = 0;</script><script src="plugins/iscroll/AC_RunActiveContent.js" language="javascript"></script>'

2 to go whewwwww my brain is getting tireddd... lol
Logged

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2010, 08:09:34 pm »

sorry im maken a mess out of this post but i cant edit the post entry and now sure why the code did not post as it should have...

ok anyway lets try it again... first there is in iscroll/codebase.php

Code: [Select]
$html = '<script language="javascript">AC_FL_RunContent = 0;</script><script src="plugins/iscroll/AC_RunActiveContent.js" language="javascript"></script>'

change to;
Code: [Select]
$html = '<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">AC_FL_RunContent = 0;</script><script src="plugins/iscroll/AC_RunActiveContent.js" language="javascript"></script>'
Logged

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2010, 08:18:44 pm »

WOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  they all three are in that same file just look and youll find them... now on with my life....

I am validated..... sorry for all the messages i thought it was going to be more involved than it was, ok im done.. thanks.  SOLVED...
Logged

Joachim Müller

  • Dev Team member
  • Coppermine addict
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 47843
  • aka "GauGau"
    • gaugau.de
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2010, 12:24:08 am »

None of the stuff you posted is part of coppermine, but stuff you deliberately added by yourself, so what answer do you expect?
Logged

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2010, 01:10:56 am »

None of the stuff you posted is part of coppermine, but stuff you deliberately added by yourself, so what answer do you expect?

lol well i was hoping maybe for a smile out of ya there bud, i have been reading alot of your posts, dont you ever just smile and laugh at some of this stuff, it is funny sometimes ya know... your so serious all the time it seems..  and thats ok...

as far as that goes i am just curious, do you not call mods/plugins part of coppermine when they are approved and posted on the plugin board.. hense then the iscroll would be coppermine code that i did not add just out of the blue... lol   

relax im just having some fun, i do appreciate your hard work, all of the dev and contributors...   peace
Logged

Joachim Müller

  • Dev Team member
  • Coppermine addict
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 47843
  • aka "GauGau"
    • gaugau.de
Re: w3c validation
« Reply #10 on: January 03, 2010, 04:17:23 pm »

lol well i was hoping maybe for a smile out of ya there bud, i have been reading alot of your posts, dont you ever just smile and laugh at some of this stuff, it is funny sometimes ya know... your so serious all the time it seems..  and thats ok...
Try to be funny in another language than your first language - you'll be in for a surprise: it's impossible. I can't write things that will make you smile in English, nor can I tell you a joke in English. I can do that in German, but I doubt that you will understand it. Let's just pretend that I do smile a lot each day, but I don't use smileys very often when posting on a forum.

as far as that goes i am just curious, do you not call mods/plugins part of coppermine when they are approved and posted on the plugin board.
None of the plugins or mods are approved in any way - they don't go through some quality control, so no: they're not part of coppermine as far as we (the coppermine dev team) are concerned. Does the US government approve anything that comes from the US? Has your posting on this forum been approved by Mr. Obama? I don't think so: you're not speaking on behalf of the US government; you just happen to live in that country as far as I can see.
I hope you get the analogy: I'm not trying to bash you (or anyone else) for being from a particular country in the world. What I'm trying to say: a lot of the modifications, add-ons, hacks and plugins that can be found on coppermine-gallery.net fail to validate in terms of W3C-compliance. There are hardly any non-trivial user contributions that are valid in the first place; they just sort-of work for their contributors, and that's fine as far as we're concerned. If you want them to validate: go ahead and change them accordingly. We'd love to see your contributions, which could for example be a reply to an announcement thread of a plugin where you post attach your copy of the plugin that you changed to make it validate.
We simply don't have the man-power to review each contribution under each aspect. Coppermine is a community effort.

I am validated..... sorry for all the messages i thought it was going to be more involved than it was, ok im done.. thanks.  SOLVED...
OK, fine - I will mark this thread accordingly (you could have done so by yourself as per board rules). However, your gallery does not validate - I get 49 errors. I suggest disabling the vanity icons. Validity in terms of HTML well-formed-ness is not the only thing that matters if you ask me: your site contains a vast section of white space for me at the top of the screen (see attached hardcopy) where you obviously try to display a flash file. I suggest taking care of that first before doing antyhing else. The hardcopy is a made-up one using the firefox plugin "screengrab" that shows the entire output of your index page. The visible area is only from top to the motorcycles album (using a 1280 x 1024 dual head resolution), that's why I'd reduce the detail level on the index page as well.
Logged

durangod

  • Coppermine novice
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: [Solved]: [Invalid]: w3c validation
« Reply #11 on: January 03, 2010, 05:40:37 pm »

cool thanks for the info, yeah it validated last night but then i added a bunch of pics and they all had similar names so w3c did not like that, but functionally it validates once i fix the pic names, i may go in and just remove the title portion in the strings anyway, i dont use them in my coding i always just put alt="" and title="" , again thanks for takeing the time to reply and i do speak for the USA and yes i have O's approval lmao  toooooooo funnnyyyyyyyyy

lets just say im jealous because you have better beer than we do, our beer is piss water compared to yours... lucky lucky guy you are...  be safe !!
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 19 queries.