Re: topmargin/leftmargin validation
by "Ted Temer" <temer(at)c-zone.net>
||Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:07:05 -0800
This "Validation" problem comes up every once in a while and usually sparks
off a war between the more "religious" of those on this list over the
unending nuances over just what is "THE" real validator.
To start with--there are several DOCTYPE statements and you can choose
different ones to get different "standards" checked by the Validators.
I could be facetious, waggish and witty and suggest you just keep trying
different DOCTYPE's until you get one to validate--but that is of course--a
bit silly. However--it is exactly what many do all the time.
One of the problems here is that W3 has fallen in love with CSS while the
major browsers--especially Netscape--are loath to give it their full
support. CSS is probably what you "should" be using in this case but I doubt
it would be that practical at this point in time.
So--once again--you have to make the hard choices--that's why you get the
big bucks. (??) Who is the web site designed for?? What browser will they be
using?? You know you can't please every dog-gone browser in the world, so
please the ones that count for this particular purpose.
Though it causes Fuzzy to clear his throat rather audibly, it has been
pointed out time and again, that having code that validates is no guarantee
that both major browsers will display it in the manner you intended.
On the FrontPage list, the generally accepted workaround for this problem is
to purchase FP2000 and then set it to allow code only supported by BOTH IE
and NN. Sure--you'll lose a few features but you can post pages that 90+% of
the surfers can view. And the slick part that seems to escape most of us--is
that FrontPage "validated" the code as it was written.
(And wonder of wonders--W3's validator is often a lot more tolerant of
FrontPage's efforts than many on this list ever seem to be.)
Again--the more "religious" will point out that by the very nature of the
beast, WYSIWYG programs always "must" include a certain amount of redundant
code. But--Such code is only text and the difference in loading speed over
that and non redundant code is measured in micro-seconds.
I blather on like this because I belong to both this list and the FP list.
And I can say flatly--without qualification--that questions of this sort
almost never come up on the FP list --- --- simply because, though FP is far
from perfect, it DOES write better code than "many" of us???
FP for example--generates the DOCTYPE statement depending on the parameters
you set--then writes what it considers, valid code for that DOCTYPE -- and
in the simple day to day real world --and in the most basic "practical"
sense, a validator is a validator, is a validator ...
I'll bet I can also guarantee that at least one will write in to point out
the shortcomings of the DNA used to create my logic circuits because I
failed to extol the virtues of the only validator they consider essential
for life as we know it. [Big silly grin]
Temercraft Designs Redding, CA
> According to my HTML 4.0 book and a fellow web designer, I.E. supports the
> topmargin, leftmargin, bottommargin, and rightmargin attributes for the
> <.body> tag. According to W3C's Validator for 4.01 Transitional, I get
> message: <.body bgcolor="#fefefe" leftmargin="0" topmargin="0">
> Error: there is no attribute "LEFTMARGIN" and
> Error: there is no attribute "TOPMARGIN"
> Confusing. And, of course, it does what it's supposed to do for the page
> W3C doesn't like it. This is the only error message I get, so I can't
> validate the page. Any comments/suggestions?
> P.S. Is there a workaround to please Netscape 4.x and 6 (ha, ha)?
> Sharon F. Malone
> "web page design and Internet writing services"
HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives,
maintained by Webmasters @ IWA