I am trying to validate my code using w3c-validator
Encoding: utf-8
Doctype:XHTML 1.0 Frameset
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Frameset//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-frameset.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>Openfire Archived IM content Search</title>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<!--The following javascript function re-directis the user to the same page-->
<script type="text/javascript">
function startover(){
window.location="http://localhost/openfireIMsearch/index.php"
}
</script>
<!--html form for start-over button. The javascript function startover() is called when the user clicks this button-->
<form method="get" action= "index.php" name = "re-login">
<input type = "button" value ="Start Over" onclick = "startover()" />
<input type = "hidden" name = "re-login-hidden" value ="re-login-on" />
</form>
</p>
</body>
</html>
I am getting the following error which I have no clue about:
Line 7, Column 6: document type does not allow element "body" here
✉ The element named above was found in a context where it is
not allowed. This could mean that you have incorrectly nested elements
-- such as a "style" element in the "body" section instead of inside "head" -- or two elements that overlap (which is not allowed). One
common cause for this error is the use of XHTML syntax in HTML
documents. Due to HTML's rules of implicitly closed elements, this
error can create cascading effects. For instance, using XHTML's
"self-closing" tags for "meta" and "link" in the "head" section of a
HTML document may cause the parser to infer the end of the "head"
section and the beginning of the "body" section (where "link" and
"meta" are not allowed; hence the reported error).
Error message seems to indicate that one reason could be my use of meta tag. But the doctype clearly indicates that the document is XHTML and not HTML. I am at loss here. Could anybody shed some light? Thanks!
Your doctype seems to be telling me that it is a frameset. This would make body tags illegal and you would instead expect to have a frameset instead. Its a while since I've done any frames though so I might be misremembering that.
And in case its not obvious the solution would be to find the correct doctype. Something like:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list.html seems to have a list to choose from (and is where I copied the above from).
Related
So, I wanted to be strict on me and took one of HTML5 pages and validated it as XHTML Strict -- all the way.
Fixed every error reading the very helpful error messages. Now the entire page is fully XHTML compliant. But the page shows only the DIVS containing the ads. The main DIV containing the page matter is gone, haha!
Here's the page for your enjoyment:
http://mypollingcenter.com/charts1.htm
Well, I apologize. The problem was that in my over-zealousness, I changed
this line:
<script src="../avazyabadu/kramaanukrama.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
to this:
<script src="../avazyabadu/kramaanukrama.js" type="text/javascript"/>
Empty tag/element rule, you know.
So, the validator took the whole thing as JavaScript, maybe?
Lessons I learned:
That JavaScript external file reference is an exception to the XHTML/XML rule. Keep the closing tag.
The “space before slash” rule is no more with XHTML.
Mark up fully compliant with strict XHTML validate as HTML5, provided you switch headings as below.
XHTML does not need character set declaration if your page is in UTF-8
Use this Validator (Not this one)
XHTML top lines:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
<head>
HTML top lines:
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en-US">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8">
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Are self-closing tags valid in HTML5?
For example:
<div id="myDiv" />
Something would then be done to populate this div using Javascript.
Is this valid HTML?
No. HTML 4.x doesn't have any concept of self closing tags.
It is valid in XHTML.
Div's are not valid self closing tags. To have an empty div it would be better to do this:
<div id="myDiv"></div>
According to the XML declaration and the XHTML 1.0 and 1.1 document definitions, this is fine: the null-end tag (>) may be used when immediately following the null-end start tag closer (/), and your code is equivalent to <div id="myDiv"></div>.
It's a different matter entirely whether any particular consumer will be able to process this correctly.
The SGML declaration used by HTML 4.01 allows tag shortening, but it has a different syntax for the null-end tags; there you can write <div id="abc"/this is a non-empty div/. Again, mileage may vary as for browser support. (My money is on "none".)
Future versions of HTML (HTML5? if that name is still alive) are no longer implemented as SGML languages, and therefore they simply allow what they say they do, without recourse to a formal grammar.
I ran these two blocks of code through the W3C validator. Copy and paste the code into the input under the Validate by Direct Input tab to see the results for yourself.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>title</title>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" >
</head>
<body><div id="Mydiv" /></body>
</html>
The code block with Doctype of transitional HTML 4.01 failed the validation process.
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en">
<head>
<title>Test</title>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" />
</head>
<body><div id="Mydiv" /></body>
</html>
When I added the XHTML 1.0 transitional doctype, changed the meta tag to a self closing tag, and added in the html xmlns line, the validation passed.
So to answer the first half of your question, it is valid HTML under the XHTML 1.0 Transitional doctype. Whether or not you can use javascript to properly populate it, I am not sure.
Self Closing Tags in XHTML as implemented by browsers:
What are all the valid self-closing elements in XHTML (as implemented by the major browsers)?
Self Closing tags in html5:
Are (non-void) self-closing tags valid in HTML5?
No, it's valid XML (not HTML), and as far as I know, will only be accepted if the document is send with an application/xml mimetype.
However, it may work with XHTML, and the XHTML Doctype declaration.
I want to output the following DOCTYPE specifier with jspx:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
This seems to be impossible. What I tried is:
<jsp:output doctype-root-element="HTML" doctype-public="-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" />
...which results in:
org.apache.jasper.JasperException: /WEB-INF/layouts/fittopage.jspx(3,100) <jsp:output>: 'doctype-root-element' and 'doctype-system' attributes must appear together
(I'm using Tomcat 6.0). I don't want to include a SYSTEM identifier containing the DTD's URI (in this case doctype-system="http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd") because that reproducibly causes browsers (Firefox and Chrome) to render the page differently (or not at all).
Re: Garret Wilson's question: "So how do I output <!DOCTYPE html> for HTML 5 with the JSP document (JSPX) syntax? Is it even possible?"
This can be done with jsp:text. (It cannot be done with jsp:output).
The current version of JSP specification is JavaServer Pages Specification Version 2.3. (Implemented in current Java EE 8 (Tomcat 9.x) as well as previous Java EE 7 (Tomcat 8.x)). Quoting from chapter JSP.5.6 "<jsp:output\>":
The doctype-root-element, doctype-system and doctype-public properties allow the page author to specify that a DOCTYPE be automatically generated in the XML prolog of the output. Without these properties, the DOCTYPE would need to be output manually via a <jsp:text> element before the root element of the JSP document, which is inconvenient.
A DOCTYPE must be automatically output if and only if the doctype-system
element appears in the translation unit as part of a <jsp:output> action. The doctype-root-element must appear and must only appear if the doctype-system property appears, or a translation error must occur. The doctype-public property is optional, but must not appear unless the doctype-system property appears, or a translation error must occur.
Until somebody asks the specification committee for more flexibility here, and a new version of specification comes out, this is all that we have.
An example using jsp:text:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<jsp:root xmlns:jsp="http://java.sun.com/JSP/Page" version="2.3">
<jsp:directive.page contentType="text/html" />
<jsp:text><!DOCTYPE html></jsp:text>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="${pageContext.response.characterEncoding}"/>
<title>Hello world</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Hello world!</h1>
</body>
</html>
</jsp:root>
I was just checking to see if it was valid to put an <iframe> element inside a <noscript> element as a fall back for displaying dynamic content. It validated fine with the HTML 5 doctype, but for HTML 4.01, I get the following error:
Line 9, Column 35: element "IFRAME" undefined
<iframe name="test" src="test.htm"></iframe>
You have used the element named above in your document, but the document type you are using does not define an element of that name. This error is often caused by:
incorrect use of the "Strict" document type with a document that uses frames (e.g. you must use the "Frameset" document type to get the "" element),
by using vendor proprietary extensions such as "" or "" (this is usually fixed by using CSS to achieve the desired effect instead).
by using upper-case tags in XHTML (in XHTML attributes and elements must be all lower-case).
This is what I whittled the HTML down to:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>I AM YOUR DOCUMENT TITLE REPLACE ME</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div>
<iframe name="test" src="test.htm"></iframe>
</div>
</body>
</html>
The <iframe> element is defined in the HTML 4.01 specification at the following URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/present/frames.html#h-16.5.
It passes with a transitional doctype, so I guess my question is "Why is it disallowed in a strict doctype, even though it's defined in the specification?".
"Why is it disallowed in a strict doctype, even though it's defined in the specification?
Lots of things are defined in the specification but not allowed in Strict. <font> springs to mind. These are the things that the developers of the specification considered in need of documenting, were in use in browsers in the day, but which should be transitioned away from.
I can think of two reasons why they might have thought that:
"Why do iframes suck?".
<iframe> does (in theory) little that can't be achieved with <object>
iframe isn't included in html strict. For validation, try using the object element instead.
<object data="test.html" type="text/html"></object>
You should also add width and height attributes to the object element. Note, unlike iframes objects cannot be a target for any page links.
Unless for some reason you specifically need html4 strict validation, it's better to use the html5 doctype.
I am using few facebook social plugins and I am using the meta header. When validating the page, the W3C validator is throwing the error -> "Error: there is no attribute "property".
I am using the XHTML Transitional doctype - <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
Pls Suggest if I have to change the doctype to something else.
Facebook's plugins use Open Graph, which is built on RDFa. It's RDFa that adds the property attribute to elements. Without this addition, plain HTML has no such attribute. (If you ask me, it's a strange design to add a new attribute without namespacing it, and to re-use half of a <meta> tag. But no-one did.)
To validate XHTML-with-RDFa, you'll need the DOCTYPE:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML+RDFa 1.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-1.dtd">
This means you will have to be writing valid XHTML 1.1. More
In order for a document to claim that it is a conforming HTML+RDFa document, it must provide the facilities described as mandatory in this section. The document conformance criteria are listed below, of which only a subset are mandatory:
All document conformance requirements stated as mandatory in the HTML5 specification must be met.
There should be a version attribute on the html element. The value of the version attribute should be HTML+RDFa 1.0 if the document is a non-XML mode document, or XHTML+RDFa 1.0 if the document is a XML mode document.
There may be a link element contained in the head element that contains profile for the the rel attribute and http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab for the href attribute.
Example:
<html version="HTML+RDFa 1.1" lang="en">
<head>
<title>Example Document</title>
</head>
<body>
<p>Moved to example.org.</p>
</body>
</html>
As Open Graph suggests, if you're using HTML5, you're better off just using a prefix attribute like this:
<!doctype html>
<html prefix="og: http://ogp.me/ns#">
<head>
<title>HTML5 site</title>
<meta property="og:title" content="The Rock" />
</head>
<body>
</body>
</html>
You can leave the doctype as is and it will validate.
This approach has also been recommended by an Open Graph developer.