Freepages-Help-L ArchivesArchiver > Freepages-Help > 2002-04 > 1019547191
From: Amino-x <>
Subject: [FreeHelp] Re: Freepages-Help-D Digest V02 #177
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 02:33:11 -0500
I often find myself so frustrated by the W3C validator I sometimes
tend to scream "forget it" and go with my own code whether it validates
The concept behind the validation process is to create code
that at the very least, works on all available browsers (IE, NS,
Opera, Amaya etc.) as well as is compatable with browsing aids for
the physically challanged. The ALT tabs are read by voice readers
for the visually impared (my father was visually impared and taught
5th grade at the school for the blind for 25 years :) so for placeholder
gifs, something simple like ALT="dot" or ALT="placeholder" tells
the blind visitor what he's supposed to be seeing, or not seeing
Often, one small glitch in coding will send the validator into
a frenzy of errors (such as putting a <P> where it shouldnt be
can cause 10 more errors that arent really errors).
I use a freeware program called HTML Kit (a text editor with
line numbers) to debug code that I really want validated, and find
that more often than not, fixing one error eliminates 3 or 4.
By simply fixing, uploading and then clicking RELOAD or REFRESH
on the validator page, it will re-validate the page without having
to tell it where the file is again, or you can put the re-validate
tag on the page and everytime you change the page, just click at
the bottom of the page and Poof! re-validation :)
Unfortunantly, things like Search Engines, Hit Counters and
anything else the parser isnt set to recognize will be flagged as
an error. My tip, just remove those for validations sake, once validated,
add them back to your page and publish. :)
If all else fails, forget the W3C and enjoy your creation.
The fact that you have taken the time to check in more than one browser
(especially NS4) says that you genuinly care about producing a quality
The page its-self looks great. I particularly like that light
blue background. I have seen many sites here at Rootsweb as well
as Genweb where the creator used a background that was either the
same color as the text (making the text invisible) or was so awful
you couldnt stand to look at it to read it.
Your page has consistancy, balance and is generally nice to
look at. Excellant graphics and very well thought out. It loads fast
(no big images to bog down transfer) and no useless gimmicks that
Good show! :)
On Tuesday, 23 April 2002, you wrote:
>Hello listers -
>I've finally uploaded my new and hopefully improved site. Some
>First, when I ran the pages through the W3C Validator, it was rather
>insitant that I include the "ALT" attribute for all of the 1 pixel
>use as placeholders in my tables. C'mon, is that really necessary?
>the Validator was very displeased with my nesting of tables within
>paragraphs within a list within a table. (You may remember my earlier
>re the workability of that formatting.) But it displays exactly
the way I
>want it to in I.E.5 and Netscape 4.05. Is it a hopeless muddle
>browsers? The page in question is the "My Sources" page, to which
>link from my index page. Which brings me to my next question.
My site is
>designed with the curious and somewhat aimless visitor in mind.
A place to
>rummage about and explore, rather than systematically tour. I wouldn't
>it's entirely disorganized. but it's not always clear how to navigate
>one place to another, or if there might be something you've missed.
>of like it that way. Am I the only one who does? I figure I can
>submit a GEDCOM to WorldConnect if I want to present organized genealogical
>information. This site is really meant for my family. For that
>want it to look "homey", and even a little amateurish. But I don't
>to be a total mess, either. Some of my relatives use Web TV, and
I want it
>to display nicely for them. You can find it at
>Thanks for taking a peek.
>P.S. I notice the ads aren't displaying, but assume that's a Rootsweb
|[FreeHelp] Re: Freepages-Help-D Digest V02 #177 by Amino-x <>|