w3c validator errors

Hi guys There is many w3c validator errors. Maybe its good idea to clean up a code a little ? 

will need to rewrite all modules again :)

It would be very hard to get this software completely W3C compliant.  The biggest issue with dolphin is the CSS.  According to all validator, dolphin CSS is extremely inefficient and redundant.  It needs a complete rewrite but given the 10,000+ lines of code, who will do it?

I think the real question should be - why wasn't it done right in the first place?

that is a redundant question SF.

Regards,

DosDawg

oh oh oh one other thing that should be corrected and HOW~~~~

<?

needs to be <?php

and that is done easy enough with a find and replace, how come thats not been done, and again, why was it ever done incorrectly to start with. and they actually expect modders to be held to a higher standard than the actual developers. go figure that one.

Regards,

DosDawg

RE:

W3C validation errors

Microsoft.com home page: 364 errors

Espn.com home page: 701 errors

aol.com home page: 888 errors

myspace.com home page: 144 errors



My Dolphin site front page: 170 errors

My conclusion: Find something else to bitch about, because this topic simply isn't worth the time I just spent composing this message.

Yeah, I have to fully agree with HL. Rather complain about the color of the grass outside. If you want to reduce the w3c errors then start getting your hands dirty and dive into the CSS and code.

One thing is, DosDawg has a point with the <? should be replaced with <?php.

But otherwise, quickly take a peak out the window and start complaining about the grass (or snow if it be)

@DosDawg - totally agree - short tags are simply lazy coding - I've complained about this before, not only does it prevent the script being run on some servers, but there are also issues with short tags and XML. (opening tag is similar). There are lot's of other examples of lazy coding elsewhere too - but I'll stick with the topic this time.

RE W3C - sorry HL - have to disagree - Yes lots of the big players have non-confirming sites, but this is no reason for the rest of us to be slack. Many of the everyday issues faced by web developers and webmasters, are directly as a result of failure to comply with simple web standards. Internet Explorer being the biggest example.

I think that freakpower is right in raising the issue. Boonex should really come to the party and address it. It doesn't take too long to go through a site and make it compliant - one coder could do the basic D7 install in less than a week. Additionally, all new code should be validated before being released. IMHO, coders who churn out non-compliant code and mods are simply doing half a job, and not really coders at all. It sucks to think that there are X amount of new dolphin sites this week that are adding to the non-compliant code out there.

Idealistic?

...Maybe. But...

I think that we should all be responsible for pushing the web forwards, and in this respect making some noise and raising awareness of web standards is a good thing. Consider those noobs, who read the post and see that it's apparently okay to ignore web standards - after all Micro$oft do it, so it has to be fine - it's not the right signal to send.

*DeeEmm stands down from soap box*

Incidentally. Micro$oft have their own W3C validator, and their site validates perfectly in it. Of course you have to be viewing it in IE6, with the sound turned down, but according to Microsoft this is an acceptable way of browsing the web. Microsoft are fully stoked that they finally have a compliant site, even if they had to write their own validator to achieve it. As a result they have extended IE6 support until 2014. Microsoft are hoping that with the release of IE12 in 2014, those pesky web standards nerds would have found something better to complain about. IE12 is set to redefine the way that we use and view the internet, although conditional statements will continue to be supported in case they stuff it up yet again.

;)

/DM

Why should he be responsible for fixing someone else F-Up??

Boonex are providing the product not freakpower.

In that case, you got 41 errors on your home page that you need to go fix.

LOL. Last time he mentioned standards, i checked he site too and saw it had errors. But......... I kept my mouth shut.

LOL - that's TinyMCE for you. (and my point exactly)

Will fix them up for you later

/DM

LOL - why?

I pay enough people out in here, only fair that I get a little back every now and then.

/DM

OK HL, all validation errors are now fixed for you. Thanks for pointing them out.

Just to drive my earlier point home. It turns out the issue was the kunena block module that I installed to aggregate forum posts on the front page. The mod incorrectly used HL and BR tags, causing the validation errors.

So I modded the code to fix the issues - but in all reality why should I have to do this?? And more to the point - Why should those who do not have the skills to fix the issues have to put up with them?

/DM

I see quite good discussion here :-) . Well guys I think code should be standartised - compliant - its good for scrpits to run better, faster, less browsers errors etc... The argument that if a majority of sites has many errors lets dont care about it is wrong. Its like u say why I shouldnt stole things if there is many thiefs out there etc....  Common I dont think that fixing of 170 errors is impossible task . I think its about max one month job for a good coder even in messed dolphin code... I have no knowledge to do it but guys.... wake up instead of saying we dont care about w3c errors support this thread to push dolphin devs to do something about that... I think most of u guys will agree that if we will have clean code is a good thing - not wrong thing

RE:

I'm afraid the CSS police have located another 14 errors on your demo site front page.  Talk to me when you fix that abomination of a website.

W3C validation errors can be fixed the by the local webmaster if they want to take the time to correct them.  I really don't want Boonex tied up fixing those trivial issues when we have other program busting bugs out there.  Honestly perfect W3C validation are the curtain fixtures, you do them once the house is built, the leaks fixed, and the electricity and plumbing working correctly.

LOL it's a beta - and the original code is now over 6 years old, but thanks for the concern. The funniest thing is that I actually say

...Designed with simplicity and ease of use in mind, and written with standards compliant HTML and CSS

You could really bag me for that statement - Guess I should also thank you for your kindness.

@mauricecano - Yes very true - Boonex do have much bigger issues to address first

/DM

You know what is funnier.  The support tab has a "Live Help" picture holder that has never once gone from "Live Help Offline" to "Live Help Online".  I would say the live help is deceptive at best knowing they don't have the capacity for live help.  Can you imagine the queue line if it ever went live?