W3 Validation

[omulcock]

Hi,

Does anybody have any ideas on how we can reduce the number of errors on our home page?

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ww...ic-lawns.co.uk

The 6 that are left all seem to be Actinic related ones.

[NormanRouxel]

These tags home brewed HTML tags that Actinic uses and are essential to its correct operation. They're not doing any harm so don't worry about them.

The fact that a page fails strict validation doesn't mean it won't work properly in all major browsers and search engines.

A core part of how browsers are expected to work is that they simply ignore unknown tags.

[omulcock]

Thanks Norman.

I was thinking that we could probably survive with 6 errors and the HTML is as valid as its going to get but my client is very keen on being compliant with everything.

[RuralWeb]

I have spent many hours trying to get Actinic to validate - I can get a brochure page down to 9 errors but the product pages I dont think will ever validate due to the reasons Norman gives.

[george]

Hmmm, wondering if the Actinic peeps are looking into this validation thing, or maybe its something we're not ever going to get easily...


...or even a W3 based theme?

[cdicken]

Hmmm, worndering if the Actinic peeps are looking into this validation thing, or maybe its something we're not ever going to get easily...

You'll be pleased to hear that it's something we have been working on.

Unfortunately, we cannot change the proprietary Actinic tags that are in the HTML (e.g. NOWSERVING, BASEHREF etc.) but we have sorted out all the other w3c problems in the next major release of Actinic.

[george]

Wise move.



Feel free to offer me a W3C trial run too...