HTML validation

Is it true that if my XHTML is conforming to the w3c XHTML DTD, my
XHTML is validated and no need to run the HTML validation hosted on
w3c web page?

Thanks.

howa wrote:

Is it true that if my XHTML is conforming to the w3c XHTML DTD, my
XHTML is validated and no need to run the HTML validation hosted on
w3c web page?

I am not sure I understand the question. Are you asking whether the
browser validates your XHTML? No, browsers like IE or Mozilla certainly
don't do that.

--

Martin Honnen
http://JavaScript.FAQTs.com/

howa wrote:

Is it true that if my XHTML is conforming to the w3c XHTML DTD, my
XHTML is validated and no need to run the HTML validation hosted on
w3c web page?

The point of running the validation on the W3C site is to find out
*whether* your XHTML is conforming (presupposing that you *want* to know
whether it is). If you already *know* that it is, why would you be
testing it to find out *whether* it is? Conversely, if you haven't run
it through a validator, how do you know it's valid?

On 17 Mar, 15:45, howa <howac... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Is it true that if my XHTML is conforming to the w3c XHTML DTD, my
XHTML is validated and no need to run the HTML validation hosted on
w3c web page?

Yes, but be careful.

NB - This only applies for XHTML 1.0, not 1.1 or 2.0

XHTML 1.0 isn't usable on the web, because IE won't work with it. To
get round this you cheat, by using the Appendix C hack. You write
XHTML, but you tell IE that it's really HTML. Because browsers have to
cope with all sorts of rubbish, IE is pretty happy to process this
XHTML document as if it were HTML. However it's still processing it
_as_ HTML, so it's possible that you may have coded something that's
conformant XHTML but not conformant HTML.

It is possible that your XHTML document isn't good practice for HTML.
Using <br></br> is a simple example (you ought to use <br /> instead).
However these errors aren't enough to make it "invalid" from a
validator's point of view. I can't think of an example that's
conformant XHTML yet isn't simultaneously conformant HTML (at least in
an automatically detectable context). Maybe Jukka can point out some
obscure case when this does happen.

You _do_ need to check that your web server serves your XHTML content
"correctly" as text/html, at least when the browser agent behaves like
IE and requests this. A validator would check that for you, but really
you ought to be able to tell anyway.

Scripsit howa:

Is it true that if my XHTML is conforming to the w3c XHTML DTD, my
XHTML is validated and no need to run the HTML validation hosted on
w3c web page?

People have interpreted your apparently odd question in different ways,
and here's yet another interpretation: If you have verified the validity
of an XHTML document, using a locally installed validator or a remotely
hosted validator other than the W3C validator, then yes, validation has
been carried out and you don't need to use the W3C validator.

The crucial question, however, is whether you have actually used a
validator or something else. There are even people who make money by
selling their software as "HTML validator" even though it isn't a
validator.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

On 3$B7n(B18$BF|(B, $B>e8a(B12$B;~(B59$BJ,(B, Andy Dingley <ding... (AT) codesmiths (DOT) com> wrote:

On 17 Mar, 15:45, howa <howac... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Is it true that if my XHTML is conforming to the w3c XHTML DTD, my
XHTML is validated and no need to run the HTML validation hosted on
w3c web page?

Yes, but be careful.

NB - This only applies for XHTML 1.0, not 1.1 or 2.0

XHTML 1.0 isn't usable on the web, because IE won't work with it. To
get round this you cheat, by using the Appendix C hack. You write
XHTML, but you tell IE that it's really HTML. Because browsers have to
cope with all sorts of rubbish, IE is pretty happy to process this
XHTML document as if it were HTML. However it's still processing it
_as_ HTML, so it's possible that you may have coded something that's
conformant XHTML but not conformant HTML.

Thanks all, what I want is to use a XML validator to verify the
document...automatically if I got the DTD and XML.

From the point of view of all you guy said XHTML is not that `good` as
expected, yes I am aware of. (at least in my case, I can validate
xhtml automatically and easily)

Thanks.

Andy Dingley wrote:

XHTML 1.0 isn't usable on the web, because IE won't work with it.

B---S---

In article <fs1kss$272$1 (AT) registered (DOT) motzarella.org>,
C A Upsdell <cupsdell (AT) upsdell (DOT) invalid> wrote:

Andy Dingley wrote:
XHTML 1.0 isn't usable on the web, because IE won't work with it.

B---S---

Not really.

(Have you noticed, C A, that I have selected you to practice what
I am bad at, namely brevity. Are you saying something like "I
should be so lucky"? <g>)

--
dorayme

"C A Upsdell" <cupsdell (AT) upsdell (DOT) invalid> wrote

Andy Dingley wrote:
XHTML 1.0 isn't usable on the web, because IE won't work with it.

B---S---

This is discussed somewhere at least once a week.

Feed XHTML to IE (any version) properly as 'application/xhtml+xml' and
admire how it politely asks you if you want to download it. That is not
"working with it" IMHO.

Serve XHTML to IE as "text/html" and it happily tag soup error corrects it
to HTML. That is also not "working with it".

--
Richard.

dorayme wrote:

In article <fs1kss$272$1 (AT) registered (DOT) motzarella.org>,
C A Upsdell <cupsdell (AT) upsdell (DOT) invalid> wrote:

Andy Dingley wrote:
XHTML 1.0 isn't usable on the web, because IE won't work with it.
B---S---

Not really.

Really. It is BS, and I am sure that Dingley knows it is BS. As you --
and he, and most people in this newsgroup -- are aware:

1. IE does not support XHTML.

2. BUT: IE does render XHTML well with a media type of text/html.

3. AND: the W3C blesses the use of text/html when dealing with user
agents like IE: see the W3C document, "XHTML Media Types", which among
other things requires that the media type be text/html for HTML agents,
that the media type be application/xhtml+xml for XHTML user agents ...
and notes that content negotiation may be used to specify the
appropriate media type for each user agent.

4. THEREFORE: XHTML 1.0 is *useable*, because IE *will* work with it,
so long as the relevant W3C guidelines are followed.

What Dingley *could* have said is that the use of XHTML is not
recommended, that authors should use HTML 4.01 instead: but there is a
HUGE difference between "not usable" and "not recommended". There are
many XHTML sites on the web which are perfectly usable, even with IE.