11
gecko
Re: Let
  • 2005/4/4 22:40

  • gecko

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 152

  • Since: 2004/10/11


I agree lets aim for complete validation, strict.

12
giba
Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!
  • 2005/4/4 23:39

  • giba

  • Just can't stay away

  • Posts: 638

  • Since: 2003/4/26


Quote:

Herko Coomans wrote:
Wanikoo: PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE ADD THESE TO THE CORE DEVELOPMENT PATCH TRACKERS ON SF.NET! We will not be able to fix all these if this isn't submitted to the trackers...

Herko


Wanikoo, thanks for instructions

Contact-Us me in http://www.xoops.net.br

I can correct this in XOOPS for we version.
Very good

Congratulations Wanikoo
look: Validar Xhtml by wanikoo (perfect)

13
ideiafacil
Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!

ohhhhhhhhhh
GREAT!!

Many Thanks Wanikoo

Please post more. Post in the traker and in this forum for reference and help the users.

As many modules (no core ) with invalid output.Really bad


Xoops 2.1 XHTML 1 Strict..


this I want to see
God in helps them to arrive there

14
wanikoo
Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!
  • 2005/4/5 10:44

  • wanikoo

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 129

  • Since: 2003/12/27


--------------------------
pages with id="xxxx[]"
-------------------------
Umm...
Pages with id="xxxx[]" always gives us some error messages when validation check.
--error messages--
character "[" is not allowed in the value of attribute "id"
ID "xxxx[]" already defined
------------------

ex)/html/notifications.php

system_notification_list.html
line 13

line 21


Line 132, column 57: character "[" is not allowed in the value of attribute "id"

...>
Umm...
in this case( input ), attribute "id" is not mandatorily requested and we have another identifier, attribute "name".
so..
just remove id="del_mod[]" and id="del_not[<{$module.id}>][]"
(or if you don't want to remove attribute "id", you can keep it by changing its value like the case,viewpmsg.php mentioned before)
------------------------------
After this modification,
we can get this message, "This Page(ex: notifications.php) Is Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional!" from W3 validator.

Quote:

From http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/

4.10. The elements with 'id' and 'name' attributes
HTML 4 defined the name attribute for the elements a, applet, form, frame, iframe, img, and map. HTML 4 also introduced the id attribute. Both of these attributes are designed to be used as fragment identifiers.

In XML, fragment identifiers are of type ID, and there can only be a single attribute of type ID per element. Therefore, in XHTML 1.0 the id attribute is defined to be of type ID. In order to ensure that XHTML 1.0 documents are well-structured XML documents, XHTML 1.0 documents MUST use the id attribute when defining fragment identifiers on the elements listed above. See the HTML Compatibility Guidelines for information on ensuring such anchors are backward compatible when serving XHTML documents as media type text/html.

Note that in XHTML 1.0, the name attribute of these elements is formally deprecated, and will be removed in a subsequent version of XHTML.


C.8. Fragment Identifiers
In XML, URI-references [RFC2396] that end with fragment identifiers of the form "#foo" do not refer to elements with an attribute name="foo"; rather, they refer to elements with an attribute defined to be of type ID, e.g., the id attribute in HTML 4. Many existing HTML clients don't support the use of ID-type attributes in this way, so identical values may be supplied for both of these attributes to ensure maximum forward and backward compatibility (e.g., ...).

Further, since the set of legal values for attributes of type ID is much smaller than for those of type CDATA, the type of the name attribute has been changed to NMTOKEN. This attribute is constrained such that it can only have the same values as type ID, or as the Name production in XML 1.0 Section 2.3, production 5. Unfortunately, this constraint cannot be expressed in the XHTML 1.0 DTDs. Because of this change, care must be taken when converting existing HTML documents. The values of these attributes must be unique within the document, valid, and any references to these fragment identifiers (both internal and external) must be updated should the values be changed during conversion.

Note that the collection of legal values in XML 1.0 Section 2.3, production 5 is much larger than that permitted to be used in the ID and NAME types defined in HTML 4. When defining fragment identifiers to be backward-compatible, only strings matching the pattern [A-Za-z][A-Za-z0-9:_.-]* should be used. See Section 6.2 of [HTML4] for more information.

Finally, note that XHTML 1.0 has deprecated the name attribute of the a, applet, form, frame, iframe, img, and map elements, and it will be removed from XHTML in subsequent versions.

15
wanikoo
Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!
  • 2005/4/5 10:45

  • wanikoo

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 129

  • Since: 2003/12/27


------------------------
etc.... for some modules&blocks
-------------------------
Quote:

From http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/

4.2. Element and attribute names must be in lower case
XHTML documents must use lower case for all HTML element and attribute names. This difference is necessary because XML is case-sensitive e.g.
  • and
  • are different tags.

  • ex)

    ->it gives us some error messages
    element "TD" undefined
    there is no attribute "colspan"
    there is no attribute "id"
    end tag for element "td" which is not open
    end tag for "TD" omitted
    etc...
    Quote:

    4.4. Attribute values must always be quoted
    All attribute values must be quoted, even those which appear to be numeric.

    ex)

    ->error message
    an attribute value specification must be an attribute value literal unless SHORTTAG YES is specified
    Quote:

    4.5. Attribute Minimization
    XML does not support attribute minimization. Attribute-value pairs must be written in full. Attribute names such as compact and checked cannot occur in elements without their value being specified.

    ex}

    ->error message
    "value" is not a member of a group specified for any attribute

    16
    wanikoo
    Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!
    • 2005/4/5 14:52

    • wanikoo

    • Not too shy to talk

    • Posts: 129

    • Since: 2003/12/27


    ------------------------------------
    pages with javascript
    ------------------------------------
    ex)

    /html/misc.php
    line 71
    17
    Gambero[removed]
    Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!

    Why isn't wanikoo in XOOPS Core development Team ?

    18
    Mithrandir
    Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!

    because he hasn't asked

    19
    Herko
    Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!
    • 2005/4/5 16:50

    • Herko

    • XOOPS is my life!

    • Posts: 4238

    • Since: 2002/2/4 1


    Quote:

    Gambero wrote:
    Why isn't wanikoo in XOOPS Core development Team ?


    ...and because he can help as much by submitting these items to the trackers on sf.net, making him a 'virtual core development team member' Wanikoo is but a 'young' member, core developers most often are people a bit more 'ripened' in the community DOn't get me wrong, this is not to disqualify Wanikoo, but part of our policy on adding people to our core development team.

    As for WarDick's comment on trackers being a black box, you're absolutely right there. That is one of the things we're addressing in the new development roadmap, starting already with the development of XOOPS 2.1/2.2, as you can see by Mithrandir's recent posts on sf.net and these forums The most apparent reason of it having been a black box for so long is that XOOPS 2.0.x has been a bugfix/security patches branch (as it should have been). This means that there has been a feature freeze on the core, at least where database changes are concerned (you will find that there have been no changes to any core database tables since 2.0.1). Now, with the development of XOOPS 2.1 starting, this feature freeze has been selectively lifted. With the coming roadmap for X2.1/2.2 you will get a good view of what is going to happen, and tracker status fits in that roadmap strategy.

    Herko

    20
    Gambero[removed]
    Re: Let's make XOOPS valid xhtml1.0 transitional!

    Quote:
    ...and because he can help as much by submitting these items to the trackers on sf.net, making him a 'virtual core development team member' Wanikoo is but a 'young' member, core developers most often are people a bit more 'ripened' in the community DOn't get me wrong, this is not to disqualify Wanikoo, but part of our policy on adding people to our core development team.


    This is a little offtopic but I would just like to say this.

    Wanikoo looks a very good programmer (in PHP) and he helps saving bugs everytime. I think he likes XOOPS and would be a great member in core development team. He deserves to be a part of you ... Mithrandir just remember how many times he helped you out ... and if I can see this, then probably you too. And like you said he just need to ask. So, wanikoo: ASK!

    Login

    Who's Online

    249 user(s) are online (133 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)


    Members: 0


    Guests: 249


    more...

    Donat-O-Meter

    Stats
    Goal: $100.00
    Due Date: Nov 30
    Gross Amount: $0.00
    Net Balance: $0.00
    Left to go: $100.00
    Make donations with PayPal!

    Latest GitHub Commits