Discussion:
Error: Stray start tag script.
(too old to reply)
dale
2019-01-03 00:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

I am getting a HTML error when I use the W3C Nu checker on my site

https://www.dalekelly.org/

<https://www.dalekelly.org/>

Error: Stray start tag script.
From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
</body>↩↩ <script>'undef

while I am searching for lines, columns and potential syntax errors,
could anyone find the solution?

Note, I have a CSS for my main 5 pages. Error seems to have just showed
up lately.

There is an HTML and CSS checker button on each page. No errors when I
run the CSS checker on each page.

Occurs on Windows 10 with same error on Edge, Chrome, Internet Explorer
and Firefox browsers.

You can find the CSS scripts and code for all pages on:

https://github.com/dalekellytoo/website

<https://github.com/dalekellytoo/website>
--
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.
Good guy
2019-01-03 00:59:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
Hi,
I am getting a HTML error when I use the W3C Nu checker on my site
https://www.dalekelly.org/
<https://www.dalekelly.org/>
Error: Stray start tag script.
From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
</body>↩↩ <script>'undef
while I am searching for lines, columns and potential syntax errors,
could anyone find the solution?
Note, I have a CSS for my main 5 pages. Error seems to have just
showed up lately.
There is an HTML and CSS checker button on each page. No errors when I
run the CSS checker on each page.
Occurs on Windows 10 with same error on Edge, Chrome, Internet
Explorer and Firefox browsers.
https://github.com/dalekellytoo/website
<https://github.com/dalekellytoo/website>
</div>
<script>'undefined'=== typeof _trfq || (window._trfq =
[]);'undefined'=== typeof _trfd &&
(window._trfd=[]),_trfd.push({'tccl.baseHost':'secureserver.net'}),_trfd.push({'ap':'cpsh'},{'server':'p3plcpnl0242'})
// Monitoring performance to make your website faster. If you want to
opt-out, please contact web hosting support.</script><script
src='https://img1.wsimg.com/tcc/tcc_l.combined.1.0.6.min.js'></script></html>
</body>
In HTML everything has to be within the page and the page ends when
</body> is reached.
dale
2019-01-03 01:25:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Good guy
Post by dale
Hi,
I am getting a HTML error when I use the W3C Nu checker on my site
https://www.dalekelly.org/
<https://www.dalekelly.org/>
Error: Stray start tag script.
From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
</body>↩↩    <script>'undef
while I am searching for lines, columns and potential syntax errors,
could anyone find the solution?
Note, I have a CSS for my main 5 pages. Error seems to have just
showed up lately.
There is an HTML and CSS checker button on each page. No errors when I
run the CSS checker on each page.
Occurs on Windows 10 with same error on Edge, Chrome, Internet
Explorer and Firefox browsers.
https://github.com/dalekellytoo/website
<https://github.com/dalekellytoo/website>
</div>
  <script>'undefined'=== typeof _trfq || (window._trfq =
[]);'undefined'=== typeof _trfd &&
(window._trfd=[]),_trfd.push({'tccl.baseHost':'secureserver.net'}),_trfd.push({'ap':'cpsh'},{'server':'p3plcpnl0242'})
// Monitoring performance to make your website faster. If you want to
opt-out, please contact web hosting support.</script><script
src='https://img1.wsimg.com/tcc/tcc_l.combined.1.0.6.min.js'></script></html>
 </body>
In HTML everything has to be within the page and the page ends when
</body> is reached.
Where do you see a script below </body>?

The only thing I have below </body> is </html>

has always worked before. Are you suggesting I put </html> before </body>?

doesn't <html> enclose <body> as the type of language <body> is, in the
beginning to end?

Nevertheless, Thank You Very Much !!!, it looks like my provider is
doing something new.
--
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.
David E. Ross
2019-01-03 03:42:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
Post by Good guy
Post by dale
Hi,
I am getting a HTML error when I use the W3C Nu checker on my site
https://www.dalekelly.org/
<https://www.dalekelly.org/>
Error: Stray start tag script.
From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
</body>↩↩    <script>'undef
while I am searching for lines, columns and potential syntax errors,
could anyone find the solution?
Note, I have a CSS for my main 5 pages. Error seems to have just
showed up lately.
There is an HTML and CSS checker button on each page. No errors when I
run the CSS checker on each page.
Occurs on Windows 10 with same error on Edge, Chrome, Internet
Explorer and Firefox browsers.
https://github.com/dalekellytoo/website
<https://github.com/dalekellytoo/website>
</div>
  <script>'undefined'=== typeof _trfq || (window._trfq =
[]);'undefined'=== typeof _trfd &&
(window._trfd=[]),_trfd.push({'tccl.baseHost':'secureserver.net'}),_trfd.push({'ap':'cpsh'},{'server':'p3plcpnl0242'})
// Monitoring performance to make your website faster. If you want to
opt-out, please contact web hosting support.</script><script
src='https://img1.wsimg.com/tcc/tcc_l.combined.1.0.6.min.js'></script></html>
 </body>
In HTML everything has to be within the page and the page ends when
</body> is reached.
Where do you see a script below </body>?
The only thing I have below </body> is </html>
has always worked before. Are you suggesting I put </html> before </body>?
doesn't <html> enclose <body> as the type of language <body> is, in the
beginning to end?
Nevertheless, Thank You Very Much !!!, it looks like my provider is
doing something new.
The script is neither in the head nor the body. Yes, the page ends with
</html>, not with </body>. However, everything -- except for <html> and
</html> -- should be in either the head or the body; and neither one of
those can be in the other. The whole is then within <html> and </html>.

Your script must be part of either (a) or (b) in the following:

<html>
<head>
head content (a)
</head>
<body>
body content (b)
</body>
</html>

There should be nothing between <html> and <head>, between </head> and
<body>, or between </body> and </html>. The only thing that can be
before <html> is <!DOCTYPE>. Nothing can follow </html>.
--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

President Trump still insists that Mexico will eventually pay for
his border wall. If he really believes that, why does he not pay
for it out of his personal billions of dollars and then personally
collect from Mexico?
dale
2019-01-03 02:41:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Good guy
Hi,
I am getting a HTML error ...
...
Post by Good guy
</div>
  <script>'undefined'=== typeof _trfq || (window._trfq =
[]);'undefined'=== typeof _trfd &&
(window._trfd=[]),_trfd.push({'tccl.baseHost':'secureserver.net'}),_trfd.push({'ap':'cpsh'},{'server':'p3plcpnl0242'})
// Monitoring performance to make your website faster. If you want to
opt-out, please contact web hosting support.</script><script
src='https://img1.wsimg.com/tcc/tcc_l.combined.1.0.6.min.js'></script></html>
I can get this error to show, before changing the code, if I select
"show source" before I check the page
Post by Good guy
 </body>
In HTML everything has to be within the page and the page ends when
</body> is reached.
--
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.
😉 Good Guy 😉
2019-01-03 03:09:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
I can get this error to show, before changing the code, if I select
"show source" before I check the page
Post by Good guy
Post by dale
</body>
In HTML everything has to be within the page and the page ends when
</body> is reached.
<!DOCTYPEhtml>
<htmllang="en">
<head>
<title>Welcome!</title>
<metahttp-equiv="content-type"content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<metaname="author"content="Dale Kelly">
<metaname="keywords"content="HTML,CSS">
<linkrel="icon"href="Loading Image...">
<linkrel="stylesheet"type="text/css"href="https://www.dalekelly.org/mystyle.css">
<metaname="viewport"content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
<metaproperty="og:type"content="website"/>
<metaproperty="og:url"content="https://www.dalekelly.org/"/>
<metaproperty="og:description"content="A place for me to share my
thoughts."/>
<metaproperty="og:title"content="Dale's Website"/>
<metaname="robots"content="nofollow">
</head>
<body>
<ulclass="sidenav">
<li><ahref="#title">CLICK THESE</a></li>
<li><aclass="active"href="https://www.dalekelly.org/index.html">HOME</a></li>
<li><ahref="https://www.dalekelly.org/images.html">IMAGES</a></li>
<li><ahref="https://www.dalekelly.org/howto.html">HOWTO</a></li>
<li><ahref="https://www.dalekelly.org/links.html">LINKS</a></li>
<li><ahref="https://www.dalekelly.org/weblog.html">BLOG</a></li>
</ul>
<divclass="content">
<h1>Dale's Website</h1>
<i>This is my personal website for ethusiastic expression. These
expressions should not be interpreted as professional opinions.</i>
<br>
<p>Min. Dale R. Kelly B.S.E.Chem.E., B.Msc., M.Sc., Ph.D.</p>
<i>American Association of Drugless Practitioners Certificate#
56603712</i><br>
<i>American Alternative Medicine Association Certificate# 92383802</i>
<br><br>
<ahref="Loading Image..."
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="Loading Image..."
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="Loading Image..."
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:31px;"></a>
<ahref="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3rs7-EVEmwkp2n1TogWuFg"><img
src="Loading Image..."alt="Valid
HTML 4.01 Strict"
style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="Loading Image..."
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="Loading Image..."
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="Loading Image..."
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:88px;height:31px;"></a>
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<br>
<h2>In process ...</h2>
<imgsrc="Loading Image..."
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"width="198"height="142">
<br>
<ul>
<li>social media - dalekellytoo - or click icons above</li>
</ul>
<footer>
<ahref="https://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer"><imgsrc="https://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-html401"
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"height="31"width="88"></a>
<ahref="https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer"><img
style="border:0;width:88px;height:31px"src="https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/images/vcss-blue"
alt="Valid CSS!"/></a>
<br>
<i>I am looking for a more environmentally conscience .gif
chemistry animation.</i>
<i>Thanks to W3 Schools for teaching website programming.</i>
<br>
</footer>
</div>
<script>'undefined'=== typeof_trfq || (window._trfq = []);
'undefined'=== typeof_trfd && (window._trfd = []), _trfd.push({
'tccl.baseHost': 'secureserver.net'}), _trfd.push({ 'ap': 'cpsh'}, {
'server': 'p3plcpnl0242'}) // Monitoring performance to make your
website faster. If you want to opt-out, please contact web hosting
support.</script>
<scriptsrc='https://img1.wsimg.com/tcc/tcc_l.combined.1.0.6.min.js'></script>
</body>
</html>
--
With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer
satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.
😉 Good Guy 😉
2019-01-03 03:22:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
I can get this error to show, before changing the code, if I select
"show source" before I check the page
<!DOCTYPEhtml>
<htmllang="en">
<head>
<title>Welcome!</title>
<metahttp-equiv="content-type"content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<metaname="author"content="Dale Kelly">
<metaname="keywords"content="HTML,CSS">
<linkrel="icon"href="https://www.dalekelly.org/atom.png">
<linkrel="stylesheet"type="text/css"href="https://www.dalekelly.org/mystyle.css">
<metaname="viewport"content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
<metaproperty="og:type"content="website"/>
<metaproperty="og:url"content="https://www.dalekelly.org/"/>
<metaproperty="og:description"content="A place for me to share my
thoughts."/>
<metaproperty="og:title"content="Dale's Website"/>
<metaname="robots"content="nofollow">
</head>
<body>
<ulclass="sidenav">
<li><ahref="#title">CLICK THESE</a></li>
<li><aclass="active"href="https://www.dalekelly.org/index.html">HOME</a></li>
<li><ahref="https://www.dalekelly.org/images.html">IMAGES</a></li>
<li><ahref="https://www.dalekelly.org/howto.html">HOWTO</a></li>
<li><ahref="https://www.dalekelly.org/links.html">LINKS</a></li>
<li><ahref="https://www.dalekelly.org/weblog.html">BLOG</a></li>
</ul>
<divclass="content">
<h1>Dale's Website</h1>
<i>This is my personal website for ethusiastic expression. These
expressions should not be interpreted as professional opinions.</i>
<br>
<p>Min. Dale R. Kelly B.S.E.Chem.E., B.Msc., M.Sc., Ph.D.</p>
<i>American Association of Drugless Practitioners Certificate#
56603712</i><br>
<i>American Alternative Medicine Association Certificate# 92383802</i>
<br><br>
<ahref="https://www.facebook.com/dalekellytoo/">alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="https://www.instagram.com/dalekellytoo/">alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="https://plus.google.com/116137004384124936507">alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:31px;"></a>
<ahref="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3rs7-EVEmwkp2n1TogWuFg"><img
src="https://www.dalekelly.org/images/youtube_icon32.png"alt="Valid
HTML 4.01 Strict"
style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="https://linkedin.com/in/dalekellytoo">alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="https://github.com/dalekellytoo">alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<ahref="https://www.altopia.com">alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:88px;height:31px;"></a>
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"style="width:32px;height:32px;"></a>
<br>
<h2>In process ...</h2>
<imgsrc="https://www.dalekelly.org/images/working-with-chemicals.gif"
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"width="198"height="142">
<br>
<ul>
<li>social media - dalekellytoo - or click icons above</li>
</ul>
<footer>
<ahref="https://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer"><imgsrc="https://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-html401"
alt="Valid HTML 4.01 Strict"height="31"width="88"></a>
<ahref="https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer"><img
style="border:0;width:88px;height:31px"src="https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/images/vcss-blue"
alt="Valid CSS!"/></a>
<br>
<i>I am looking for a more environmentally conscience .gif
chemistry animation.</i>
<i>Thanks to W3 Schools for teaching website programming.</i>
<br>
</footer>
</div>
<script>'undefined'=== typeof_trfq || (window._trfq = []);
'undefined'=== typeof_trfd && (window._trfd = []), _trfd.push({
'tccl.baseHost': 'secureserver.net'}), _trfd.push({ 'ap': 'cpsh'}, {
'server': 'p3plcpnl0242'}) // Monitoring performance to make your
website faster. If you want to opt-out, please contact web hosting
support.</script>
<scriptsrc='https://img1.wsimg.com/tcc/tcc_l.combined.1.0.6.min.js'></script>
</body>
</html>
--
With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer
satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.
😉 Good Guy 😉
2019-01-03 03:36:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
I can get this error to show, before changing the code, if I select
"show source" before I check the page
This is in pen:

<https://codepen.io/anon/pen/BvJEdj>

You can copy and paste it in your document and it will validate. I have
checked it myself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You seem to have problems understanding what I am saying here!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--
With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer
satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.
dale
2019-01-03 12:03:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by 😉 Good Guy 😉
Post by dale
I can get this error to show, before changing the code, if I select
"show source" before I check the page
<https://codepen.io/anon/pen/BvJEdj>
You can copy and paste it in your document and it will validate.  I have
checked it myself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You seem to have problems understanding what I am saying here!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The script in question wasn't mine. It was from my hosting provider. I
called and opted-out. I didn't want any javascript on my page anyway.

THANKS MUCH!!!
--
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.
Mayayana
2019-01-03 01:31:09 UTC
Permalink
"dale" <***@dalekelly.org> wrote

| Error: Stray start tag script.
| From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
| </body>?? <script>'undef
|

Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like your webhost injected that and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)

On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better
webpages. The important thing is whether it works
as you expect in the major browsers.

It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
that doesn't inject crap into your pages.
dale
2019-01-03 01:53:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| Error: Stray start tag script.
| From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
| </body>?? <script>'undef
|
Maybe because it's outside the body tag?
the footer is inside the body?
Post by Mayayana
But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like your webhost injected that and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
that is for posting a link of my site to facebook or twitter, can't
recall this being an error last time I checked, wasn't reliably working
though
Post by Mayayana
On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better
webpages. The important thing is whether it works
as you expect in the major browsers.
I have learned to check other browsers
Post by Mayayana
It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
that doesn't inject crap into your pages.
I'm stuck for awhile, have always been responsive though

Thanks Much !!!
--
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.
dale
2019-01-03 11:59:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| Error: Stray start tag script.
| From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
| </body>?? <script>'undef
|
Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like your webhost injected that and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better
webpages. The important thing is whether it works
as you expect in the major browsers.
It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
that doesn't inject crap into your pages.
The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and
opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE!
--
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.
dale
2019-01-13 03:09:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
Post by Mayayana
| Error: Stray start tag script.
| From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
| </body>?? <script>'undef
|
   Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like your webhost injected that and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
   On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better
webpages. The important thing is whether it works
as you expect in the major browsers.
   It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
that doesn't inject crap into your pages.
The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and
opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE!
I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service
--
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.
silverslimer
2019-01-13 13:48:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
Post by dale
Post by Mayayana
| Error: Stray start tag script.
| From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
| </body>?? <script>'undef
|
   Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like your webhost injected that and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
   On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better
webpages. The important thing is whether it works
as you expect in the major browsers.
   It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
that doesn't inject crap into your pages.
The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and
opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE!
I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service
But they bend to the Antifa who consider anyone who disagrees with
them to be Nazis, racists, fascists and sexists. If you're registered
a domain name with them, you can be sure that you'll lose it if ever
you upset the Communist morons.
Paul
2019-01-13 15:54:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
Post by dale
Post by Mayayana
| Error: Stray start tag script.
| From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
| </body>?? <script>'undef
|
Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like your webhost injected that and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better
webpages. The important thing is whether it works
as you expect in the major browsers.
It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
that doesn't inject crap into your pages.
The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and
opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE!
I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service
<something> <something> "You darker kids get off my lawn"
I guess that counts as a second testimonial, a kind
of antiparticle version of "+1" . It sounds like
they're doing a GREAT job. Thanks for those comments Slimer.

Paul
Lewis
2019-01-13 17:08:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by silverslimer
Post by dale
Post by dale
Post by Mayayana
| Error: Stray start tag script.
| From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9
| </body>?? <script>'undef
|
   Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like your webhost injected that and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
   On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better
webpages. The important thing is whether it works
as you expect in the major browsers.
   It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
that doesn't inject crap into your pages.
The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and
opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE!
I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service
But they bend to the Antifa who consider anyone who disagrees with
them to be Nazis, racists, fascists and sexists. If you're registered
a domain name with them, you can be sure that you'll lose it if ever
you upset the Communist morons.
Translation: If you’re a neo Nazis fascist racist sack of shit,
companies will not host your neo Nazis fascist racist sack of shit web
site.

And yes, all rational people are Anti Fascist.
--
The Piper's calling you to join him
Tim Streater
2019-01-13 17:14:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lewis
Post by silverslimer
But they bend to the Antifa who consider anyone who disagrees with
them to be Nazis, racists, fascists and sexists. If you're registered
a domain name with them, you can be sure that you'll lose it if ever
you upset the Communist morons.
Translation: If you’re a neo Nazis fascist racist sack of shit,
companies will not host your neo Nazis fascist racist sack of shit web
site.
And yes, all rational people are Anti Fascist.
True. But Antifa is actually a fascist entity, as seen by their
no-platforming and other bully-boy antics. But then many university
campuses seem to have forgotten what "free speech" and "open debate"
mean.
--
I was brought up to believe that you should never give offence if you can avoid
it; the new culture tells us you should always take offence if you can. There
are now experts in the art of taking offence, indeed whole academic subjects,
such as 'gender studies', devoted to it.

Roger Scruton
😉 Good Guy 😉
2019-01-13 18:16:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service
I had a contact with them only once when my eMail wasn't receiving
anything but I was able to send. They reset the account and it took
them only 10 minutes to do this. It was all by chat line and they tend
to bend backwards to sort out obvious problems!!.

Your scrip[t problem is the first time I have heard of. I have never
seen a host injecting any scripts especially when you are paying them to
host. Microsoft, AWS or Netlify can do this because they have a free
versions (or sort of) for static sites (these are sites that allows
J-scripts but no PHP or SQL) but they also don't. At least not for now
but things may change in the future. Paying customers should not have
to accept any crap from the host. Me thinks so.
--
With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer
satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.
dale
2019-01-13 21:39:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by 😉 Good Guy 😉
Post by dale
I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service
I had a contact with them only once when my eMail wasn't receiving
anything but I was able to send.  They reset the account and it took
them only 10 minutes to do this.  It was all by chat line and they tend
to bend backwards to sort out obvious problems!!.
Your scrip[t problem is the first time I have heard of.  I have never
seen a host injecting any scripts especially when you are paying them to
host.  Microsoft, AWS or Netlify can do this because they have a free
versions (or sort of) for static sites (these are sites that allows
J-scripts but no PHP or SQL) but they also don't. At least not for now
but things may change in the future.  Paying customers should not have
to accept any crap from the host.  Me thinks so.
I usually call and get just as prompt of service.
--
dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/
Not a professional opinion unless specified.
Joy Beeson
2019-01-06 01:51:07 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 20:31:09 -0500, "Mayayana"
Post by Mayayana
On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
Because getting rid of errors that don't matter makes it much easier
to find errors that do matter.
--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
Mayayana
2019-01-06 03:34:52 UTC
Permalink
"Joy Beeson" <***@invalid.net.invalid> wrote

| > On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
|
| Because getting rid of errors that don't matter makes it much easier
| to find errors that do matter.
|

That doesn't make sense. If they don't matter then
they don't affect anything.

W3C takes a letter-of-the-law approach. The main
point is whether your pages display properly in different
browsers. For instance, not declaring DOCTYPE is
considered an error. But that's used to indicate quirks
mode for IE. I don't want my pages parsed as HTML5.
It's too brittle. You can say I'm wrong, but my
pages display right.

Many of the errors that come up are describing HTML
attributes as obsolete. But they work. It's just a stickler's
attitude that all attributes should be in CSS. Not all CSS
is recognized, especially by older IE versions.

It tells me <A NAME is obsolete. It's standard HTML 4.
W3C says I should put an ID on the nearest container
instead. But that only relates to scripting. If I use
A HREF="someID" and then assign someID to a DIV, the
link won't jump to the DIV. It will look for a file named
someID.
And in older versions of IE a DIV is not a block container.
It makes no sense. <A NAME has a very specific purpose.

It tells me VALIGN for a TD is obsolete. But it works.
It tells me multiple matching IDs are an error.
It tells me an IMG element mush have an ALT attribute.
That's for accessibility. But an IMG that's just used for
formatting is not relevant to the blind.

Web design is not a science. There are too many
quirks in browsers for that.
Lewis
2019-01-06 11:41:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| > On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
|
| Because getting rid of errors that don't matter makes it much easier
| to find errors that do matter.
|
That doesn't make sense. If they don't matter then
they don't affect anything.
It makes perfect sense. You are obviously not a coder.
Post by Mayayana
W3C takes a letter-of-the-law approach. The main
point is whether your pages display properly in different
browsers. For instance, not declaring DOCTYPE is
considered an error. But that's used to indicate quirks
mode for IE. I don't want my pages parsed as HTML5.
It's too brittle. You can say I'm wrong, but my
pages display right.
You are scared of HTML5 and are writing for IE. In 2019. Wow.

Have fun living in your quirks bubble of shame.

(rest of nonsense deleted)
--
The point about being killed by magic was that it was much more
inventive than, say, steel; there were all sorts of interesting new ways
to die, and he couldn't put out of his mind the shapes he'd seen, just
for an instant, before the wash of octarine fire had mercifully engulfed
them. --Sourcery
Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)
2019-01-06 14:06:18 UTC
Permalink
People, the same stuff is being posted in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html and alt.html. If it really makes
sense to post in both groups, please learn how to cross-post, i.e. post
to both groups at the same time. People with a sensible newsreader will
then see the posts only once; if they are marked as read in one group,
then they will be marked as read in another.

If you don't know what a sensible newsreader is, what crossposting is,
what "marked as read" means, then consider how much time you are
wasting.
Mayayana
2019-01-06 14:40:10 UTC
Permalink
"Lewis" <***@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote

| You are scared of HTML5 and are writing for IE. In 2019. Wow.
|
| Have fun living in your quirks bubble of shame.
|

:) That's quite a moralistic indictment. I wasn't aware
that HTML5 was a moral issue.

I guess that highlights a fundamental shift in web
design over the years. It used to be that rule #1 was
that a page should work in all browsers and degrade
gracefully. That meant that if you wanted to use
javascript for jazzy effects it shouldn't break your
page. Nothing should be Flash-dependent. An IMG
or A tag, especially, shouldn't break without script,
since that's entirely unnecessary. If you want to use
the latest HTML or CSS those things, also, shouldn't
break the page.

The basic idea was simply that webpages should work.

I go by that rule because I want to make attractive
pages that are functional. I don't regard visitors with
older browsers as "shameful". I don't throw rotten
fruit at people who disable script. I try to code without
needing script. I don't believe people using IE8 should be
tarred and feathered. They bought their computer and
they use it. If they want to access my pages then I
hope they can. And I hope they can find something
useful.
On the other hand, I also don't cater to people on
phones. They're not paying attention. If they actually
want something on my site then they'll be back via
computer screen. That means I have no need to
"lazy-load" different sized images and break the page
by doing it.

The newer approach is entirely different. The Web is
being redefined as an ad-supported services technology.
Phones are big. apps are big. Spying and ads are big.
Increasingly, web pages are not HTML at all but rather
software programs written in javascript and designed
to run in a browser. If people can't load the page,
screw 'em. They probably weren't going to spend any
money, anyway. And Google's ad server won't pay
you if you can't track your visitors and force a popup
on them.
Big companies and small are increasingly
insisting on a new browser with script enabled. And
many deliberately sabotage their pages to break
without script.

Do you think those people are coders? Most are just
pasting in the latest gimmicks written into "libraries"
like jquery, in their WYSIWYG webpage editor and
actually have no idea how brittle and their pages are.

They have simple priorites: Create content that allows
for showing as many ads as possible to as many people
as possible. Collect as much data as possible. Sell it.
Rinse and repeat.

That reminds me of a realtor who had a webpage
made entirely with Flash. I pointed out that some
people wouldn't be able to see his pages. But he
wanted "max pizzazz". He sniffed that the people he
was interested in seeing his site would surely have
"this Flash or whatever it is".

So allow me to also wish you well as a cutting edge
2019-er: I hope you also have fun with your HTML5-
conforming frozen-yogurt-and-bubble-tea-shop-finder
phone app.
Might I suggest a good name for your auspicious
launch into enterprise riches? Slurp n' Burp might be
good. Tapioca Orgasm? Or maybe jump on the bactria
fad bandwagon: Frozen Biome or Acidophi-Fun. (You
can have those names for free. Just don't expect that y
ou'll be able to show me an ad because I won't have
your app.)
nospam
2019-01-06 17:29:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
I go by that rule because I want to make attractive
pages that are functional. I don't regard visitors with
older browsers as "shameful". I don't throw rotten
fruit at people who disable script. I try to code without
needing script. I don't believe people using IE8 should be
tarred and feathered.
just the ones who use edge, then?
Post by Mayayana
They bought their computer and
they use it. If they want to access my pages then I
hope they can. And I hope they can find something
useful.
On the other hand, I also don't cater to people on
phones. They're not paying attention. If they actually
want something on my site then they'll be back via
computer screen.
there's a lot more people using phones and tablets to browse, and if
your site looks like shit, they likely won't be back. also google will
rank you lower if there's no mobile-friendly version, so that affects
non-mobile users.
Post by Mayayana
That means I have no need to
"lazy-load" different sized images and break the page
by doing it.
it means you don't understand much about web design.
Lewis
2019-01-06 19:17:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| You are scared of HTML5 and are writing for IE. In 2019. Wow.
|
| Have fun living in your quirks bubble of shame.
|
:) That's quite a moralistic indictment. I wasn't aware
that HTML5 was a moral issue.
I think you are confused about the meaning of morals.
Post by Mayayana
I go by that rule because I want to make attractive
pages that are functional.
And are too lazy to learn how to do it properly.
Post by Mayayana
On the other hand, I also don't cater to people on
phones. They're not paying attention. If they actually
want something on my site then they'll be back via
computer screen. That means I have no need to
"lazy-load" different sized images and break the page
by doing it.
GET OFF MY LAWN YOU DAMN KIDS!

Writing a responsive page that looks good on anyone's device does not
require breaking anything at all. It also doesn't require the "oooo
scary!" JavaScript.

You simply don't want to take the time to learn how to do things
correctly. Which is fine. But to pretend your laziness is some stand
against evil is absurd, bordering on delusional.

If you are writing against IE8 (less than 1 in a thousand web users)
while ignoring Safari, Chrome, and Firefox current versions (98% of
webusers) then you are foolish. But by all means, be foolish. Just don't
tell other people to emulate you.
--
"If this is the best God can do, I'm not impressed."
Mayayana
2019-01-06 20:05:15 UTC
Permalink
"Lewis" <***@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote

| If you are writing against IE8 (less than 1 in a thousand web users)
| while ignoring Safari, Chrome, and Firefox current versions (98% of
| webusers) then you are foolish.

Where did you get that? I never said any such thing.
Perhaps you could relax your trigger finger a bit and read
what I'm writing.

I said I try to support all browsers as much as possible.
And I said I consider that more important than strict
adherence to the latest standards.

I actually maintain 2 sets of pages -- one for IE and
one for all other browsers. I support IE6+ along with
all standards browsers -- Chromish and Mozilliate, let's
say.

Though I don't currently support Edge. It's broken as a
version of IE, doesn't seem to be the same as other
browsers, and is basically a boutique browser that can
only run on Win10. It also has a very small user base.
2-4% last I saw. But if Microsoft converts it to a
Chrome clone, as expected, then I should be able to
support it.
nospam
2019-01-06 20:15:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| If you are writing against IE8 (less than 1 in a thousand web users)
| while ignoring Safari, Chrome, and Firefox current versions (98% of
| webusers) then you are foolish.
Where did you get that? I never said any such thing.
Perhaps you could relax your trigger finger a bit and read
what I'm writing.
I said I try to support all browsers as much as possible.
but you don't.
Post by Mayayana
And I said I consider that more important than strict
adherence to the latest standards.
that's what the standards are for.
Post by Mayayana
I actually maintain 2 sets of pages -- one for IE and
one for all other browsers. I support IE6+ along with
all standards browsers -- Chromish and Mozilliate, let's
say.
then you're doing it wrong.
Tim Streater
2019-01-06 13:35:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| > On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
|
| Because getting rid of errors that don't matter makes it much easier
| to find errors that do matter.
|
That doesn't make sense. If they don't matter then
they don't affect anything.
W3C takes a letter-of-the-law approach. The main
point is whether your pages display properly in different
browsers. For instance, not declaring DOCTYPE is
considered an error. But that's used to indicate quirks
mode for IE.
This is the case for all browsers.
Post by Mayayana
I don't want my pages parsed as HTML5.
Yes you do. All my pages are declared as HTML5.
Post by Mayayana
It's too brittle. You can say I'm wrong, but my
pages display right.
HTML5 is the *reverse* of brittle. It was the XHMTL fiends who tried to
insist that a page with any errors in it should not display at all.

The HTML5 people figured out how to allow browsers to recover from
poorly-written or erroneous HTML and that is what all browsers do
today.
Post by Mayayana
Many of the errors that come up are describing HTML
attributes as obsolete. But they work. It's just a stickler's
attitude that all attributes should be in CSS. Not all CSS
is recognized, especially by older IE versions.
I dunno why you're bothering to validate anyway. It just tells you a
lot of stuff you don't need to know. What you *do* need to now is that
all these obsolete/deprecated elements will continue to be implemented
in browsers for ever.
--
"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689
Andy Burns
2019-01-06 13:45:44 UTC
Permalink
What you *do* need to now is that all these obsolete/deprecated
elements will continue to be implemented in browsers for ever.
<blink>oh yeah?</blink>
Tim Streater
2019-01-06 13:58:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Burns
What you *do* need to now is that all these obsolete/deprecated
elements will continue to be implemented in browsers for ever.
<blink>oh yeah?</blink>
That's the exception that proves the rule. Now try to come up with
another 10 elements no longer implemented in browsers.
--
"A committee is a cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured and then
quietly strangled." - Sir Barnett Cocks (1907-1989)
Mayayana
2019-01-06 14:45:39 UTC
Permalink
"Tim Streater" <***@greenbee.net> wrote

| That's the exception that proves the rule. Now try to come up with
| another 10 elements no longer implemented in browsers.
|

I was recently looking at a friend's site. Made in
Front Page with FONT tags. It's not pretty, but
it works. Which is more than I can say for Wix
sites and a lot of current news sites that either
have DIVs piled on top of each other or have
text so big (optimized for phones) that I can't
read it.
Tim Streater
2019-01-06 15:09:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| That's the exception that proves the rule. Now try to come up with
| another 10 elements no longer implemented in browsers.
I was recently looking at a friend's site. Made in
Front Page with FONT tags. It's not pretty, but
it works. Which is more than I can say for Wix
sites and a lot of current news sites that either
have DIVs piled on top of each other or have
text so big (optimized for phones) that I can't
read it.
And it will continue to work under HTML5.
--
Lady Astor: "If you were my husband I'd give you poison." Churchill: "If
you were my wife, I'd drink it."
Scott Bryce
2019-01-06 18:02:10 UTC
Permalink
I was recently looking at a friend's site. Made in Front Page
God help him if he ever needs to modify that site.
Mayayana
2019-01-06 20:10:48 UTC
Permalink
"Scott Bryce" <***@scottbryce.com> wrote

| > I was recently looking at a friend's site. Made in Front Page
|
| God help him if he ever needs to modify that site.
|
:) I was hoping to do God's job for Him. This is an
old friend and his business has been a big help to
me over the years.

But you're right, of course. He's been editing in
a WYSIWYG GUI for 20 years. The FTP functionality
is hidden from him. And I just can't get him to make
the leap to learning some code. He needs to not only
update his site but to also be able to do edits
occasionally. So his choices are really to accept
my help and learn some coding, or hire a web
designer who will probably charge him a monthly
fee, holding his site hostage and serving as a bottleneck
that page edits must go through. There are millions
of small businesses in that bind.
Scott Bryce
2019-01-06 20:26:24 UTC
Permalink
I was recently looking at a friend's site. Made in Front Page
God help him if he ever needs to modify that site. |
:) I was hoping to do God's job for Him.
Back in the day, when I was sometimes called upon to help fix other
people's sites, I had a standing policy that I would not work on any
site that had been created with FrontPage. The code is just too messy.
Almost any edit would break the entire page. It was easier to just
rebuild the whole thing from scratch.

But that is also a good reason to validate your HTML. Valid HTML is
easier to edit, and more likely to work across browsers, including
browsers you don't have the luxury of testing in.
So his choices are really to accept my help and learn some coding
Do him a favor, and teach him to do it right by writing code that validates.
David B.
2019-01-06 20:42:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Bryce
I was recently looking at a friend's site. Made in Front Page
God help him if he ever needs to modify that site. |
:)  I was hoping to do God's job for Him.
Back in the day, when I was sometimes called upon to help fix other
people's sites, I had a standing policy that I would not work on any
site that had been created with FrontPage. The code is just too messy.
Almost any edit would break the entire page. It was easier to just
rebuild the whole thing from scratch.
But that is also a good reason to validate your HTML. Valid HTML is
easier to edit, and more likely to work across browsers, including
browsers you don't have the luxury of testing in.
It would be helpful if Mayayana were to post a link to the URL of his
friend's website - simply so that others could actually SEE the mess
which is his coding!
Post by Scott Bryce
So his choices are really to accept my help and learn some coding
Do him a favor, and teach him to do it right by writing code that validates.
I've learned much by studying the coding instructions posted here:-

www.tekrider.net

The site owner has also stressed the need to validate one's code.
--
David B.
David B.
2019-01-06 20:47:04 UTC
Permalink
On 06/01/2019 20:42, David B. wrote:
[....]
Post by David B.
I've learned much by studying the coding instructions posted here:-
www.tekrider.net
The site owner has also stressed the need to validate one's code.
All looks good! :-)

https://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tekrider.net%2Fpages%2Findex.php
--
David B.
Mayayana
2019-01-06 21:21:18 UTC
Permalink
"David B." <"David B"@nomail.afraid.org> wrote


| It would be helpful if Mayayana were to post a link to the URL of his
| friend's website - simply so that others could actually SEE the mess
| which is his coding!
|

Would you understand it? Front Page was an early
WYSIWYG editor. So it did a lot of clunky things,
like using a table just to put some space around a
line of text. And using FONT tags. And using lots
and lots of &nbsp; There was no CSS then. But
the point was that it still works fine today, even
though FONT was deprecated ages ago and a lot
of hotshot web designers would laugh you out of
the room for using TABLE.

The other problem with Front Page was that it made
everything easy by hiding the code and FTP. Like
Wix or Wordpress today, you could set up a website
with drag-drop but then you have no idea how to
manage it without those tools.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-06 22:14:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
It would be helpful if Mayayana were to post a link to the URL of his
friend's website - simply so that others could actually SEE the mess
which is his coding!
..but YOU wouldn't understand any of it.
Post by David B.
I've learned much by studying the coding instructions posted here:-
www. tekrider. net
You haven't learned anything about HTML from there. There is nothing on my
site that relates to this thread. Knock off your damn stalking.
--
-bts
David B.
2019-01-06 23:08:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
It would be helpful if Mayayana were to post a link to the URL of his
friend's website - simply so that others could actually SEE the mess
which is his coding!
..but YOU wouldn't understand any of it.
Perhaps so - but other folk might!

I'd still like to take a look anyway.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
I've learned much by studying the coding instructions posted here:-
www. tekrider. net
You haven't learned anything about HTML from there. There is nothing on my
site that relates to this thread. Knock off your damn stalking.
The other day Mayayana wrote:-

Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like *your webhost injected* and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
[....]
It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
*that doesn't inject crap into your pages*.

Message-ID: <q0jon6$jeu$***@dont-email.me>

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154681544400

=

Thinking back to that 'code' I found on YOUR website, BTS, might it have
been GoDaddy (that's YOUR host!) which injected the 'code' which I found
onto your website page?

I don't understand why YOU aren't curious about what happened.

=

Please don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger! ;-)
--
David B.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-07 00:02:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
It would be helpful if Mayayana were to post a link to the URL of his
friend's website - simply so that others could actually SEE the mess
which is his coding!
..but YOU wouldn't understand any of it.
Perhaps so - but other folk might
I'd still like to take a look anyway.
At what? You don't understand coding AT ALL.
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
I've learned much by studying the coding instructions posted here:-
www. tekrider. net
You haven't learned anything about HTML from there. There is nothing on
my site that relates to this thread. Knock off your damn stalking.
The other day Mayayana wrote:-
It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host *that doesn't inject
crap into your pages*.
Thinking back to that 'code' I found on YOUR website, BTS, might it have
been GoDaddy (that's YOUR host!)
GoDaddy *IS NOT* my web host. You know nothing about web sites other than
what your browser displays to you. Think back to ibuoy.co.uk - your
miserable failed attempt at writing your own site.
Post by David B.
which injected the 'code' which I found onto your website page?
GoDaddy injects nothing, and does not have the capability to do so.
Post by David B.
I don't understand why YOU aren't curious about what happened.
I'm not curious because I KNOW you are a stalker.
Post by David B.
Please don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger! ;-)
No, you are a *STALKER*.

Read up on this:
<https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%2F12%
2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F>

If you think validation is so important, why don't you fix all YOUR errors
before you attempt to tell others to fix theirs.
--
-bts
David B.
2019-01-07 11:08:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
It would be helpful if Mayayana were to post a link to the URL of his
friend's website - simply so that others could actually SEE the mess
which is his coding!
..but YOU wouldn't understand any of it.
Perhaps so - but other folk might
I'd still like to take a look anyway.
At what? You don't understand coding AT ALL.
Mahayana's web page! I've learned a great deal! :-)
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
I've learned much by studying the coding instructions posted here:-
www. tekrider. net
You haven't learned anything about HTML from there. There is nothing on
my site that relates to this thread. Knock off your damn stalking.
The other day Mayayana wrote:-
It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host *that doesn't inject
crap into your pages*.
Thinking back to that 'code' I found on YOUR website, BTS, might it have
been GoDaddy (that's YOUR host!)
GoDaddy *IS NOT* my web host. You know nothing about web sites other than
what your browser displays to you. Think back to ibuoy.co.uk - your
miserable failed attempt at writing your own site.
Huh? Then WHOIS your web host????????????

Domain Name: TEKRIDER.NET
Registry Domain ID: 1447011823_DOMAIN_NET-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.godaddy.com
Registrar URL: http://www.godaddy.com
Updated Date: 2018-04-04T15:49:07Z
Creation Date: 2008-04-10T14:01:36Z
Registry Expiry Date: 2020-04-10T14:01:36Z
Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC
Registrar IANA ID: 146
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: ***@godaddy.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: 480-624-2505
Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited
https://icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited
Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited
https://icann.org/epp#clientRenewProhibited
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited
https://icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited
Name Server: NS1.GENWEBSERVER.COM
Name Server: NS2.GENWEBSERVER.COM
DNSSEC: unsigned
URL of the ICANN Whois Inaccuracy Complaint Form:
https://www.icann.org/wicf/
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Last update of whois database: 2019-01-07T10:58:41Z <<<
which injected the 'code' which I found onto your website page?
GoDaddy injects nothing, and does not have the capability to do so.
Post by David B.
I don't understand why YOU aren't curious about what happened.
I'm not curious because I KNOW you are a stalker.
Post by David B.
Please don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger! ;-)
No, you are a *STALKER*.
<https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%2F12%
2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F>
I will.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
If you think validation is so important, why don't you fix all YOUR errors
before you attempt to tell others to fix theirs.
I'm not telling anyone anything! Have you been drinking?
--
David B.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-07 13:25:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
Thinking back to that 'code' I found on YOUR website, BTS, might it
have been GoDaddy (that's YOUR host!)
GoDaddy *IS NOT* my web host. You know nothing about web sites other
than what your browser displays to you. Think back to ibuoy.co.uk -
your miserable failed attempt at writing your own site.
Huh? Then WHOIS your web host????????????
GoDaddy is my domain name registrar, NOT my web host. There's no point
trying to explain it to you because even all these years of you stalking
people's web sites, you wouldn't understand it.
Post by David B.
I'm not telling anyone anything! Have you been drinking?
No, that's your practice.
--
-bts
David B.
2019-01-07 12:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
<https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%2F12%
2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F>
I actually went here as that link is borken!

https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%2F12%2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F%3E

=

I did! My URL seems to work just fine! :-)

https://vxer.home.blog/2018/12/08/vxer-a-profile/

Even though THIS address does NOT! :-(

https://vxer.home.blog/2018/12/08/vxer-a-profile/>

IO Error: HTTP resource not retrievable. The HTTP status from the remote
server was: 404.

https://vxer.home.blog/2018/12/08/vxer-a-profile/%3E

There's more to this than needed to steer a narrowboat!
--
David B.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-07 13:29:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
<https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%
2F12%
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F>
I actually went here as that link is borken!
Mo, it is not. It's simply wrapped and you weren't smart enough to figure
that out.
Post by David B.
I did! My URL seems to work just fine! :-)
What about the nearly fifty errors on your page?
--
-bts
David B.
2019-01-07 16:13:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
<https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%
2F12%
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F>
I actually went here as that link is broken!
https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%2F12%2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F%3E
No, it is not. It's simply wrapped and you weren't smart enough to figure
that out.
A man of your experience should be able to provide an UN-wrapped link.
If *I* can do it, so can you!

https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%2F12%2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F%3E
I did! My URL seems to work just fine! :-)
What about the nearly fifty errors on your page?
Huh? I see this:-

"Document checking not completed. The result cannot be determined due to
a non-document-error."

I'll provide an image if you advise which facility you will trust (and
view).
--
David B.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-07 17:46:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
What about the nearly fifty errors on your page?
Huh? I see this:-
"Document checking not completed. The result cannot be determined due to
a non-document-error."
I'll provide an image if you advise which facility you will trust (and
view).
You do not need to provide an image. The reason is simple. You inserted
the link in the validator and included the trailing ">" but not the
starting one. The page has *47* errors. In addition, the page has 2 CSS
errors and *380* warnings.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

Man up and fix it.
--
-bts
Tim Streater
2019-01-07 17:50:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
What about the nearly fifty errors on your page?
Huh? I see this:-
"Document checking not completed. The result cannot be determined due to
a non-document-error."
I'll provide an image if you advise which facility you will trust (and
view).
You do not need to provide an image. The reason is simple. You inserted
the link in the validator and included the trailing ">" but not the
starting one. The page has *47* errors. In addition, the page has 2 CSS
errors and *380* warnings.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Man up and fix it.
This sort of bollocks appears to be typical of Our David.
--
When I saw how the European Union was developing, it was very obvious what they
had in mind was not democratic. In Britain you vote for a government so the
government has to listen to you, and if you don't like it you can change it.

Tony Benn
David B.
2019-01-07 18:22:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Streater
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
What about the nearly fifty errors on your page?
Huh?  I see this:-
"Document checking not completed. The result cannot be determined due to
a non-document-error."
I'll provide an image if you advise which facility you will trust (and
view).
You do not need to provide an image. The reason is simple. You
inserted the link in the validator and included the trailing ">" but
not the starting one. The page has *47* errors. In addition, the page
has 2 CSS errors and *380* warnings.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Man up and fix it.
This sort of bollocks appears to be typical of Our David.
Tim

What SHOULD I do about these errors? Just your opinion I realise.

=

Nu Html Checker
This tool is an ongoing experiment in better HTML checking, and its
behavior remains subject to change

Showing results for https://vxer.home.blog/2018/12/08/vxer-a-profile

Checker Input
Show sourceoutlineimage report

Check by


Use the Message Filtering button below to hide/show particular messages,
and to see total counts of errors and warnings.
Message Filtering
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 10, column 3; to line 10, column 229
low' />↩ <script
src='https://r-login.wordpress.com/remote-login.php?action=js&amp;host=vxer.home.blog&amp;id…&amp;back=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%2F12%2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile%2F'
type="text/javascript"></scri
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 11, column 3; to line 11, column 33
script>↩ <script type="text/javascript">↩ /*
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 28, column 2; to line 28, column 32
eed/" />↩ <script type="text/javascript">↩ /*
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 43, column 4; to line 43, column 34
cript>↩ <script type="text/javascript">↩ wi
Warning: The type attribute for the style element is not needed and
should be omitted.
From line 47, column 3; to line 47, column 25
script>↩ <style type="text/css">↩img.w
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 64, column 1; to line 64, column 239
='all' />↩<script type='text/javascript'
src='https://s0.wp.com/_static/??-eJyFztEKwjAMBdAfsquTiXsRv6XWOFKXtDb…bIxv4ChnDITqEh5A/2kRVYF0vxjCOYIpDdUG+16BpXXIqiBCIVraTfLyFPCPNfFkCT8zeTQfC5tJ7o2Hb9Yde3+24bXjRNW9I='></scri
Warning: The type attribute for the style element is not needed and
should be omitted.
From line 99, column 921; to line 99, column 972
on.ico" /><style type="text/css" id="syntaxhighlighteranchor"></styl
Warning: The banner role is unnecessary for element header.
From line 112, column 3; to line 112, column 58
ction">↩ <header id="masthead" class="site-header" role="banner">↩ <d
Warning: The navigation role is unnecessary for element nav.
From line 131, column 5; to line 131, column 72
div>↩↩ <nav id="site-navigation" class="main-navigation"
role="navigation">↩ <d
Warning: The main role is unnecessary for element main.
From line 142, column 3; to line 142, column 48
-area">↩ <main id="main" class="site-main" role="main">↩↩ ↩
Warning: The navigation role is unnecessary for element nav.
From line 191, column 2; to line 191, column 59
-->↩↩ ↩ <nav class="navigation post-navigation" role="navigation">↩ <h2
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 205, column 4; to line 205, column 52
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-1" class="comment-body">↩ <
Error: An img element must have an alt attribute, except under certain
conditions. For details, consult guidance on providing text alternatives
for images.
From line 243, column 46; to line 243, column 114
4MQN.png"><img src="Loading Image..."
style="max-width:100%;" /></a></
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 227, column 4; to line 227, column 52
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-2" class="comment-body">↩ <
Error: An img element must have an alt attribute, except under certain
conditions. For details, consult guidance on providing text alternatives
for images.
From line 269, column 46; to line 269, column 114
ZZ2d.png"><img src="Loading Image..."
style="max-width:100%;" /></a></
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 250, column 4; to line 250, column 52
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-3" class="comment-body">↩ <
Error: An img element must have an alt attribute, except under certain
conditions. For details, consult guidance on providing text alternatives
for images.
From line 292, column 46; to line 292, column 114
uWMi.jpg"><img src="Loading Image..."
style="max-width:100%;" /></a></
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 276, column 4; to line 276, column 52
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-5" class="comment-body">↩ <
Error: The frameborder attribute on the iframe element is obsolete. Use
CSS instead.
From line 321, column 26; to line 321, column 198
ed-vimeo"><iframe
src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/305979105?app_id=122963" width="176"
height="144" frameborder="0" title="raidintro" allow="autoplay;
fullscreen" allowfullscreen></ifra
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 305, column 4; to line 305, column 52
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-6" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 328, column 4; to line 328, column 53
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-10" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 362, column 4; to line 362, column 52
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-7" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 385, column 4; to line 385, column 53
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-12" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 407, column 4; to line 407, column 53
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-13" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 433, column 4; to line 433, column 53
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-18" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 455, column 4; to line 455, column 53
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-21" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 482, column 4; to line 482, column 53
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-22" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 504, column 4; to line 504, column 53
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-23" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: Article lacks heading. Consider using h2-h6 elements to add
identifying headings to all articles.
From line 558, column 4; to line 558, column 53
ment">↩ <article id="div-comment-24" class="comment-body">↩ <
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 793, column 1; to line 793, column 31
↩↩</div>↩↩<script type="text/javascript">↩var h
Warning: The contentinfo role is unnecessary for element footer.
From line 839, column 3; to line 839, column 63
nt -->↩↩ <footer id="colophon" class="site-footer" role="contentinfo">↩

Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 849, column 219; to line 849, column 300
</a></div><script type='text/javascript'
src='//0.gravatar.com/js/gprofiles.js?ver=201902y'></scri
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 850, column 1; to line 850, column 31
</script>↩<script type='text/javascript'>↩/* <!
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 855, column 1; to line 855, column 122
</script>↩<script type='text/javascript'
src='https://s1.wp.com/wp-content/mu-plugins/gravatar-hovercards/wpgroho.js?m=1380573781h'></scri
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 887, column 1; to line 887, column 31
Post by Tim Streater
↩ </div>↩<script type='text/javascript'>↩/* <!
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 892, column 1; to line 892, column 175
</script>↩<script type='text/javascript'
src='https://s2.wp.com/_static/??/wp-content/js/jquery/jquery.autoresize.js,/wp-content/mu-plugins/highlander-comments/script.js?m=1521806916j'></scri
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 916, column 2; to line 916, column 32
</div>↩↩ <script type="text/javascript">↩ win
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 938, column 1; to line 938, column 31
endif]-->↩<script type='text/javascript'>↩/* <!
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 943, column 1; to line 943, column 31
</script>↩<script type='text/javascript'>↩/* <!
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 948, column 1; to line 948, column 31
</script>↩<script type='text/javascript'>↩/* <!
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 953, column 1; to line 953, column 31
</script>↩<script type='text/javascript'>↩/* <!
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 958, column 1; to line 958, column 479
</script>↩<script type='text/javascript'
src='https://s2.wp.com/_static/??-eJydUttOwzAM/SFSj7EJXhCfgrLUbd3mhp2…zjfbloPvyYap517UI1hyxooccUS13qCCzVN5A4TOqpWsH7tJYm8NI6YpCkGquJQTrN5NujLaQ39/q43Ww3q/Xq+aX/ApnZaTs='></scri
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 959, column 1; to line 959, column 31
</script>↩<script type='text/javascript'>↩var w
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 988, column 1; to line 988, column 31
</script>↩<script type="text/javascript">↩// <!
Error: The scrolling attribute on the iframe element is obsolete. Use
CSS instead.
From line 1005, column 12; to line 1005, column 167
/script> <iframe
src='https://widgets.wp.com/likes/master.html?ver=20180319#ver=20180319'
scrolling='no' id='likes-master' name='likes-master'
style='display:none;'></ifra
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 1007, column 1; to line 1007, column 72
ul></div>↩<script src="//stats.wp.com/w.js?56" type="text/javascript"
async defer></scri
Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 1008, column 1; to line 1008, column 31
</script>↩<script type="text/javascript">↩_tkq
Document checking completed.

Used the HTML parser. Externally specified character encoding was UTF-8.
Total execution time 385 milliseconds.

About this checker • Report an issue • Version: 18.12.26
--
David B.
David B.
2019-01-07 18:04:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
What about the nearly fifty errors on your page?
Huh? I see this:-
"Document checking not completed. The result cannot be determined due to
a non-document-error."
I'll provide an image if you advise which facility you will trust (and
view).
You do not need to provide an image. The reason is simple. You inserted
the link in the validator and included the trailing ">" but not the
starting one. The page has *47* errors. In addition, the page has 2 CSS
errors and *380* warnings.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
You are right. Just *HOW* know this seems rather magical. Are you
looking over my shoulder, BTS?

https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fvxer.home.blog%2F2018%2F12%2F08%2Fvxer-a-profile
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Man up and fix it.
Sorry, it's not my field of expertise!

Shall I report matters to WordPress? After all, it is all THEIR work!
I'm just a user - or am I the product?
--
David B.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-07 18:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
I'll provide an image if you advise which facility you will trust (and
view).
You do not need to provide an image. The reason is simple. You inserted
the link in the validator and included the trailing ">" but not the
starting one. The page has *47* errors. In addition, the page has 2 CSS
errors and *380* warnings.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
You are right. Just *HOW* [you] know this seems rather magical. Are you
looking over my shoulder, BTS?
Anything and everything you don't understand is "magical." Right?
--
-bts
David B.
2019-01-07 18:46:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
I'll provide an image if you advise which facility you will trust (and
view).
You do not need to provide an image. The reason is simple. You inserted
the link in the validator and included the trailing ">" but not the
starting one. The page has *47* errors. In addition, the page has 2 CSS
errors and *380* warnings.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
You are right. Just *HOW* [you] know this seems rather magical. Are you
looking over my shoulder, BTS?
Anything and everything you don't understand is "magical." Right?
No, that's not quite right.

Here's an example which you may not have seen:-

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154688659100
--
David B.
Jonathan N. Little
2019-01-07 19:13:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154688659100
Which side do you use when the foil is shiny on both sides?
--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
David B.
2019-01-07 23:06:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154688659100
Which side do you use when the foil is shiny on both sides?
Haha! :-D

I'm sure you'll be aware that a computer and/or a SOHO router can be
compromised and the user of same will usually have absolutely no inkling
that this has occurred.

How do you protect YOUR equipment, Jonathan?

Does your protection 'work'?

*Are you SURE*? ;-)
--
David B.
Jonathan N. Little
2019-01-07 23:14:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154688659100
Which side do you use when the foil is shiny on both sides?
Haha! :-D
I'm sure you'll be aware that a computer and/or a SOHO router can be
compromised and the user of same will usually have absolutely no inkling
that this has occurred.
How do you protect YOUR equipment, Jonathan?
Server router.
Post by David B.
Does your protection 'work'?
Yes.
Post by David B.
*Are you SURE*?  ;-)
Yes. Must need PCI compliance scans and protocols.
--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
David B.
2019-01-07 23:24:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154688659100
Which side do you use when the foil is shiny on both sides?
Haha! :-D
I'm sure you'll be aware that a computer and/or a SOHO router can be
compromised and the user of same will usually have absolutely no inkling
that this has occurred.
How do you protect YOUR equipment, Jonathan?
Server router.
Post by David B.
Does your protection 'work'?
Yes.
Post by David B.
*Are you SURE*?  ;-)
Yes. Must need PCI compliance scans and protocols.
OK (I'm not sure about your 'English' in the last sentence)

Did I ever mention to you that my paternal great grandfather was a
member of the Royal Academy?

There are some of his paintings shown here:-

https://artuk.org/discover/artists/crosby-william-18301910
--
David B.
Jonathan N. Little
2019-01-08 03:58:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154688659100
Which side do you use when the foil is shiny on both sides?
Haha! :-D
I'm sure you'll be aware that a computer and/or a SOHO router can be
compromised and the user of same will usually have absolutely no inkling
that this has occurred.
How do you protect YOUR equipment, Jonathan?
Server router.
Post by David B.
Does your protection 'work'?
Yes.
Post by David B.
*Are you SURE*?  ;-)
Yes. Must need PCI compliance scans and protocols.
OK (I'm not sure about your 'English' in the last sentence)
Typo s/need/meet/

Also:

<https://www.google.com/search?q=PCI+Compliance>
--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
David B.
2019-01-08 11:25:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154688659100
Which side do you use when the foil is shiny on both sides?
Haha! :-D
I'm sure you'll be aware that a computer and/or a SOHO router can be
compromised and the user of same will usually have absolutely no inkling
that this has occurred.
How do you protect YOUR equipment, Jonathan?
Server router.
Post by David B.
Does your protection 'work'?
Yes.
Post by David B.
*Are you SURE*?  ;-)
Yes. Must need PCI compliance scans and protocols.
OK (I'm not sure about your 'English' in the last sentence)
Typo s/need/meet/
That makes a WORLD of difference! :-)
Post by Jonathan N. Little
<https://www.google.com/search?q=PCI+Compliance>
Thank you. I understand.

I'm disappointed that you didn't respond to my last question.
--
David B.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-07 20:32:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
You are right. Just *HOW* [you] know this seems rather magical. Are
you looking over my shoulder, BTS?
Anything and everything you don't understand is "magical." Right?
No, that's not quite right.
Here's an example which you may not have seen:-
http://al.howardknight.SNIP
That just proves what I said. Your router is working this morning, and you
have NO IDEA why that is so, nor why is wasn't yesterday.. It must be
*magical*.

It's also not relevant to this thread.
--
-bts
David B.
2019-01-07 23:14:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Post by David B.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
You are right. Just *HOW* [you] know this seems rather magical. Are
you looking over my shoulder, BTS?
Anything and everything you don't understand is "magical." Right?
No, that's not quite right.
Here's an example which you may not have seen:-
http://al.howardknight.SNIP
That just proves what I said. Your router is working this morning, and you
have NO IDEA why that is so, nor why is wasn't yesterday.. It must be
*magical*.
Not quite! I did reset my router to factory conditions (with a
paperclip!) and have reinstalled my operating system. Itis preset to
start-up on its own just before I get up in the morning.
Post by Beauregard T. Shagnasty
It's also not relevant to this thread.
Other people don't have to read our posts to one another. Please don't
be concerned about Usenet protocol.

*DID* you find anything of interest when you hacked my iMac?

There's nothing I have which I wouldn't willing share with you - all you
have to do is ask.
--
David B.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-08 00:26:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
*DID* you find anything of interest when you hacked my iMac?
Yes, _hundreds_ of images you use in your STALKING posts. Dossiers full of
made-up lies to go along with them.
--
-bts
Jonathan N. Little
2019-01-07 16:48:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
The other day Mayayana wrote:-
  Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like *your webhost injected* and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
[....]
  It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
*that doesn't inject crap into your pages*.
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154681544400
=
Thinking back to that 'code' I found on YOUR website, BTS, might it have
been GoDaddy (that's YOUR host!) which injected the 'code' which I found
onto your website page?
I don't understand why YOU aren't curious about what happened.
=
Please don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger! ;-)
In that instance it was hosting script injection, but in yours with
techrider.net I'd bet the "injection" was the result of the *client*.
You most likely have some browser "security" plugin or Internet
"security" software running...

BTW: Domain Registrar != Hosting Company although *some* hosting
companies offer domain registration services.
--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
David B.
2019-01-07 17:56:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
The other day Mayayana wrote:-
  Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm
not sure if they consider that an error. It looks
like *your webhost injected* and it could just
be removed. The rest of your code is very simple
and clean. (Though I don't know why you need
open graph markup.)
[....]
  It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might
want to consider getting a more professional host
*that doesn't inject crap into your pages*.
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154681544400
=
Thinking back to that 'code' I found on YOUR website, BTS, might it have
been GoDaddy (that's YOUR host!) which injected the 'code' which I found
onto your website page?
I don't understand why YOU aren't curious about what happened.
=
Please don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger! ;-)
In that instance it was hosting script injection, but in yours with
techrider.net I'd bet the "injection" was the result of the *client*.
You most likely have some browser "security" plugin or Internet
"security" software running...
Anything is possible - but I wasn't aware of something being amiss with
my Apple iMac
Post by Jonathan N. Little
BTW: Domain Registrar != Hosting Company although *some* hosting
companies offer domain registration services.
You are correct in sensing my confusion with this! I'd simply like to
understand. Can *YOU* fathom out who the 'web host' is?

This is what Virus Total tells me:-

www.tekrider.net domain information
Categories
Forcepoint ThreatSeeker uncategorized
Passive DNS Replication
Date resolved IP address
2018-12-09 192.251.238.3
Whois Lookup
Domain Name: TEKRIDER.NET
Registry Domain ID: 1447011823_DOMAIN_NET-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.godaddy.com
Registrar URL: http://www.godaddy.com
Updated Date: 2018-04-04T15:49:07Z
Creation Date: 2008-04-10T14:01:36Z
Registry Expiry Date: 2020-04-10T14:01:36Z
Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC
Registrar IANA ID: 146
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: ***@godaddy.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: 480-624-2505
Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited
https://icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited
Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited
https://icann.org/epp#clientRenewProhibited
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited
https://icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited
Name Server: NS1.GENWEBSERVER.COM
Name Server: NS2.GENWEBSERVER.COM
DNSSEC: unsigned
Updated Date: 2018-04-04T15:49:06Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2020-04-10T14:01:36Z
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.4806242505
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
http://www.icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited
http://www.icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited
Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited
http://www.icann.org/epp#clientRenewProhibited
Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited
http://www.icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited
Registry Registrant ID: Not Available From Registry
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Email: [REDACTED]@domainsbyproxy.com
Registry Admin ID: Not Available From Registry
Admin Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
Admin City: Scottsdale
Admin State/Province: Arizona
Admin Postal Code: 85260
Admin Country: US
Admin Email: [REDACTED]@domainsbyproxy.com
Registry Tech ID: Not Available From Registry
Tech Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
Tech City: Scottsdale
Tech State/Province: Arizona
Tech Postal Code: 85260
Tech Country: US
Tech Email: [REDACTED]@domainsbyproxy.com

*Sibling Domains*

mail.tekrider.net
cd59.tekrider.net
webdisk.tekrider.net
www.cd59.tekrider.net
--
David B.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
2019-01-07 18:24:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by David B.
Post by Jonathan N. Little
Post by David B.
Please don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger! ;-)
No, you are not; you're "just the STALKER."
Post by David B.
Post by Jonathan N. Little
In that instance it was hosting script injection, but in yours with
techrider.net I'd bet the "injection" was the result of the *client*.
You most likely have some browser "security" plugin or Internet
"security" software running...
Anything is possible - but I wasn't aware of something being amiss with
my Apple iMac
Post by Jonathan N. Little
BTW: Domain Registrar != Hosting Company although *some* hosting
companies offer domain registration services.
You are correct in sensing my confusion with this! I'd simply like to
understand.
It doesn't matter what the answer might be - because even when solutions
are offered to you, *YOU NEVER UNDERSTAND THEM*. You are too stupid to
learn even the most basic information about the World Wide Web and how it
works. And with more than a DECADE of your stalking, you STILL don't have
a fucking clue.
Post by David B.
Can *YOU* fathom out who the 'web host' is?
Why does it matter? Are you going to begin stalking THEM now?
Post by David B.
This is what Virus Total tells me:-
Well, that certainly is an improper tool for this branch of your stalking.

[CUT-STALKING-INFO]

Just more and more of your incessant meaningless stalking...
--
-bts
Gene Wirchenko
2019-01-07 05:36:15 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 22:34:52 -0500, "Mayayana"
Post by Mayayana
| > On the other hand, why do you care about W3C?
|
| Because getting rid of errors that don't matter makes it much easier
| to find errors that do matter.
That doesn't make sense. If they don't matter then
they don't affect anything.
They clutter things up when you are looking for the other errors.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
Mayayana
2019-01-07 15:09:05 UTC
Permalink
"Gene Wirchenko" <***@telus.net> wrote

| > That doesn't make sense. If they don't matter then
| >they don't affect anything.
|
| They clutter things up when you are looking for the other errors.
|

Clutter? Look at any major, commercial website.
Some pages are over 5 MB, with mostly unnecessary
javascript pulled in from external sources. Most also
use automated software that inserts extreme nesting,
numerous empty DIVs, and often far more CSS than
webpage content. Those pages often break in older
browsers or with script disabled. What good is it if
W3C says they have no mistakes?

Do you write code from scratch? If not you probably
have a lot of clutter. Dreamweaver? jquery? Clutter.

Last week I was looking for some kind of code to
format JSON. I found lots of webpages that would do
it. Most were using jquery, a gigantic javascript
wrapper for people who don't know how to write
script. After a lot of research I finally discovered
that I only needed one simple line of javascript in
a webpage to fornat JSON. It's built into the javascript
"engine" in browsers. That's ridiculous clutter, using
jquery to format JSON, but those webpages might
pass the W3C test.

My examples in the post above were meant to
illustrate that many things the W3C consider errors
have reasons. Changing them can sometimes break
a page. It's not always a case of overlooked errors.
For example, I don't use a DOCTYPE tag. W3C
considers that an error. But it's deliberate. It signals
quirks mode. If I use an HTML5 DOCTYPE tag then
every version of IE will render the page differently.
That means I'd need custom code for each version.
That's why so many webpages have spaghetti code
that reads like: <!-- If > IE7..... If > IE8..... If > IE9... etc

They're trying to be compliant and end up having to
write custom code to accommodate different browsers.

Joy provided a link to her own webpage. It's very
simple. I looks fine. No one even needs W3C to look for
errors because it's all very simple and clear. (Also,
Mozilla browsers show what they consider to be errors
in red in the source code view.)

Joy's page has several very real errors. </P><P>
An extra CENTER closing tag. An extra H4 closing tag.
And it has no CSS at all. Does that matter? I think
her page looks fine. And unlike most newspaper sites,
with 20px, triple-spaced text, her text displays at
my default preference because there's no CSS. So
I see a very civilized 13px verdana. Her page will
probably also look fine in any browser.
If it were me I'd fix those errors. They're easy to
find and easy to fix. And they're actual structural
errors. But the page does still work, because HTML
was designed that way. A browser is supposed to
do the best it can and not choke on errors.

I got curious and tested Wired's homepage and WashPo's
lead article. Wired had 274 errors. It's somewhat readable
for me. My error list would be blandness and everything
is too big. (The heading "MOST RECENT" is 7/16" high on
my screen! And what's with the all caps?) I also consider
serif text an error on computer screens. But that's just
my error list. At least the page is readable.
But I don't see why these sites don't check the userAgent
and only give giant text to phones. Why are they giving
phone webpages to desktops and laptops? Do they think so
littl of their own journalism that they expect it to be
read only by bored and self-conscious commuters, trying
to look busy on the bus to work?

On WashPo, W3C found 82 errors and then gave up
with an "unrecoverable error". That page looks very
good to me, except for the problem of giant text,
which forces me to view it with No Style if I want
to read very much.

(Though I should note that I'm blocking script,
so I don't see "errors" like intrusive popups, ads for
hemmorhoid cream, demands for subscriptions that
block the page, Facebook spyware iframes, videos
I didn't ask for, or the horror of modern webpages:
pointless slideshows that won't stop moving.

I even have CSS customized in Firefox and Pale
Moon to block obnoxious CSS like :before, :after, and
CSS animation. So such "error filled" webpages
still look readable and civilized to me.)

Many sites also do another thing I'd call an error:
They load CSS and images from another domain
unnecessarily. I often block external domains for
privacy and security reasons. The Web was designed
to maintain privacy between domains. That's why
cookies can only be read by the origin domain. That's
why 3rd-party cookies are actually a spyware cheat.
But loading ads from the likes of Doubleclick, and
trackers from the likes of scorecardresearch, has
become so common that webpages are now designed
to be composites of data and programming code from
multiple domains. No chance of the privacy that was
considered common sense when the Internet was
designed. Does the W3C complain about that?
Not that I know of. They're busy complaining about
people jaywalking on a country road, 18 miles from
civilization.
Scott Bryce
2019-01-07 20:30:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
Clutter?
<snipped a lot of ways many commercial sites have cluttered code>

None of this is a reason not to validate your HTML.
Post by Mayayana
They're trying to be compliant and end up having to write custom code
to accommodate different browsers.
Then they are doing it wrong.
Mayayana
2019-01-07 23:17:51 UTC
Permalink
"Scott Bryce" <***@scottbryce.com> wrote

| > They're trying to be compliant and end up having to write custom code
| > to accommodate different browsers.
|
| Then they are doing it wrong.

Whatever that means. Maybe you don't want to support
older IE versions? That's your choice, but doing so doesn't
make it wrong. It makes your pages more adaptable. Part
of how that's done is known as conditional comments,
HTML comments that only IE will read and which will be
taken as directives.

Take a look at slashdot.org. Scroll down a bit. It's
declared as HTML5 doctype. It also uses a META tag
to tell later IE versions to "do the best they can". :)

Then you'll see this:

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen, projection"
href="//a.fsdn.com/sd/classic.ssl.css?0771f26796689b4c" >
<!--[if IE 8]><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen,
projection" href="//a.fsdn.com/sd/ie8-classic.ssl.css?0771f26796689b4c"
<![endif]-->
<!--[if IE 7]><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen,
projection" href="//a.fsdn.com/sd/ie7-classic.ssl.css?0771f26796689b4c"
<![endif]-->
Those are conditional comments and have been in use,
I think, since IE6. I'm surprised you don't know that,
hanging around an HTML newsgroup. That particluar code
assigns unique stylesheets to IE7 and IE8.

In fact, oddly
enough, you're using coditional comments on your own site:

<!-- HTML5 shim and Respond.js for IE8 support of HTML5 elements and media
queries -->
<!-- WARNING: Respond.js doesn't work if you view the page via file:// -->
<!--[if lt IE 9]>
<script
src="https://oss.maxcdn.com/html5shiv/3.7.3/html5shiv.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://oss.maxcdn.com/respond/1.4.2/respond.min.js"></script>
<![endif]-->

html5shiv is a javascript import to support
IE7/8 on an HTML5 webpage without needing to understand
the differences. Maybe that's what you mean by "doing
it wrong"... that the right way is to let someone else
figure it out?

Or maybe you didn't know? It looks like the page may have
been written via a WYSIWYG editor. Your links, going
to avantlink.com, seem to be auto-generated for the
purpose of ads.

"AvantLink is intended to be an exclusive network that matches merchants and
affiliates while providing real-time analytics to both parties, enabling
them to track sales and clicks as visitors are on the page. It offers
support to affiliates in making their websites more advertiser-friendly by
changing the layout and design of the sites to promote ad placement as well
as ad visibility."

In any case, there are different ways to do things.
You're using one combination of techniques, whether
you know it or not. The main thing is that your pages
should look OK. Your pages look pretty good to me,
except that your dropdown menus don't work without
script, which is entirely avoidable. But since you seem
to host google ads, maybe you don't want to support
people who disable script.

If you don't use quirks mode by skipping the DOCTYPE
tag then each IE version will render by its own rules.
The rules are different in each version. Some little
things changed between versions. So slashdot,
despite having a fairly simple layout, uses different
stylesheets for each version and uses conditional
comments to inform the different IE versions. Personally
I think quirks mode makes more sense. Then IE6-10
dependably does it all the same way. But to each
their own.
Scott Bryce
2019-01-08 03:05:44 UTC
Permalink
On 1/7/2019 4:17 PM, Mayayana wrot
In fact, oddly enough, you're using conditional comments on your own
<snipped a bunch of example HTML that does not appear on any site I have
built.>
Mayayana
2019-01-08 04:00:58 UTC
Permalink
"Scott Bryce" <***@scottbryce.com> wrote

| > In fact, oddly enough, you're using conditional comments on your own
| > site:
|
| <snipped a bunch of example HTML that does not appear on any site I have
| built.>

Maybe you didn't build it. But you linked it on your
homepage. It's this link:

My Pacific Crest Trail Adventure
http://trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=7422

I don't mean to pry, but you're taking the liberty
of dismissing others as not knowing what they're
doing, and you provided your URL.

But it does appear that trailjournals is actually
sort of a social site for posting personal accounts.
So apparently you just joined them and then posted
the link?

I can see that the pages actually on your site are
very simple, clean, and use little or no CSS.
So you don't really need to adapt to different
browsers. There's no actual formatting to get messed
up. While I enjoy creative graphics, it's nice to see
pages like yours that allow my default font choice
to display.

Nevertheless, if you look at the trailjournals code
you can see an interesting example of a conditional
comment. (And there's the slashdot example I gave.
It's not hard to find conditional comment spaghetti
code on commercial websites.)

It's difficult to make a page that complex
that will behave the same way in all browsers. So
the authors are pulling in some kind of giveaway
javascript package to do that.

Unfortunately, that also means their page layout is
held hostage to javascript because they used that
shortcut instead of figuring out how to actually
accommodate different browsers using HTML and
CSS. So some IE versions will break without script.
And the menus are broken without script. And the
layout in general is a bit shaky, with some visual
items overlapping others.

Maybe it would look better if I enabled script. But
I'm viewing it in Firefox and it's set to be HTML5.
So I'm guessing they just used some kind of WYSIWYG
editor and settled for rough edges.

The point being, it's not wrong to write code to
accommodate different browsers. It's just flexible.
Unless you believe it's wrong to use graphical layout
at all on a webpage. Your method is certainly clean,
compatible, and lightweight. But it has it's limits.
Once you start getting into more involved graphics
and layout design -- once you go beyond what was
possible in 1998 -- you really have to use CSS and
deal with browser incompatibilities. The major non-IE
browsers are surprisingly dependable (assuming one
doesn't try to use "cutting edge" CSS and HTML too
much), for the most part, but IE is different, and
different versions of IE are different again.
David B.
2019-01-08 11:52:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| > In fact, oddly enough, you're using conditional comments on your own
|
| <snipped a bunch of example HTML that does not appear on any site I have
| built.>
Maybe you didn't build it. But you linked it on your
My Pacific Crest Trail Adventure
http://trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=7422
I don't mean to pry, but you're taking the liberty
of dismissing others as not knowing what they're
doing, and you provided your URL.
But it does appear that trailjournals is actually
sort of a social site for posting personal accounts.
So apparently you just joined them and then posted
the link?
I can see that the pages actually on your site are
very simple, clean, and use little or no CSS.
So you don't really need to adapt to different
browsers. There's no actual formatting to get messed
up. While I enjoy creative graphics, it's nice to see
pages like yours that allow my default font choice
to display.
Nevertheless, if you look at the trailjournals code
you can see an interesting example of a conditional
comment. (And there's the slashdot example I gave.
It's not hard to find conditional comment spaghetti
code on commercial websites.)
It's difficult to make a page that complex
that will behave the same way in all browsers. So
the authors are pulling in some kind of giveaway
javascript package to do that.
Unfortunately, that also means their page layout is
held hostage to javascript because they used that
shortcut instead of figuring out how to actually
accommodate different browsers using HTML and
CSS. So some IE versions will break without script.
And the menus are broken without script. And the
layout in general is a bit shaky, with some visual
items overlapping others.
Maybe it would look better if I enabled script. But
I'm viewing it in Firefox and it's set to be HTML5.
So I'm guessing they just used some kind of WYSIWYG
editor and settled for rough edges.
The point being, it's not wrong to write code to
accommodate different browsers. It's just flexible.
Unless you believe it's wrong to use graphical layout
at all on a webpage. Your method is certainly clean,
compatible, and lightweight. But it has it's limits.
Once you start getting into more involved graphics
and layout design -- once you go beyond what was
possible in 1998 -- you really have to use CSS and
deal with browser incompatibilities. The major non-IE
browsers are surprisingly dependable (assuming one
doesn't try to use "cutting edge" CSS and HTML too
much), for the most part, but IE is different, and
different versions of IE are different again.
You impress me with your technical knowledge and the way you express
yourself. Just thought I'd let you know that! :-)
--
David B.
Scott Bryce
2019-01-08 18:30:47 UTC
Permalink
Maybe you didn't build it. But you linked it on your homepage. It's
My Pacific Crest Trail Adventure
http://trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=7422
I have nothing to do with the Trail Journals site, except that...
But it does appear that trailjournals is actually sort of a social
site for posting personal accounts. So apparently you just joined
them and then posted the link?
Yes. And posting a link to a site does not mean that I would use the
same coding techniques. It just means that I linked to the site.
The point being, it's not wrong to write code to accommodate
different browsers.
Conventional wisdom in this newsgroup is that you do that by validating
your HTML.

If you want to validate in an older version of HTML to accommodate
outdated browsers, you are free to do so. I don't see how you can trust
quirks mode to render the same way in all browsers.
😉 Good Guy 😉
2019-01-08 18:41:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Bryce
Conventional wisdom in this newsgroup is that you do that by validating
your HTML.
Yes I agree with you. One should validate the HTML for standards
compliance; that is what standards are for.

Now can you just cut this crap and move somewhere else. This is just
adding more noise without adding of value here. THIS IS A WINDOWS 10
NEWSGROUP not some html/css discussion group.
--
With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer
satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.
Mayayana
2019-01-08 19:08:24 UTC
Permalink
"Scott Bryce" <***@scottbryce.com> wrote

| I don't see how you can trust
| quirks mode to render the same way in all browsers.

Not all browsers. All versions of IE, from 6-10, plus
IE11 if compatibility mode is set. Microsoft were
very considerate in providing quirks mode, which
provides an IE6-ish display, so that people who wanted
to could avoid targetting every IE version separately
with complex spaghetti code, and detailed lists of
each version's quirks. (In that sense, non-quirks
mode is the quirks mode.)

There's actually separate rendering for quirks mode:
Traditional IE rendering vs Microsoft's gradually evolving
version of "standards" rendering. And it can be queried,
as with this VBScript sample:

If document.compatMode = "CSS1Compat" Then
MsgBox "BODY content is accessed with
document.documentElement.innerHTML"
Else
MsgBox "BODY content is accessed with document.Body.innerHTML"
End If

The msgbox will change depending on DOCTYPE.

As for the other browsers, I think FF also has some
kind of quirks mode recognition, but I've never looked
into it. And I know it's not the same as IE quirks mode,
because they render differently. I only know that
Mozilla/WebKit seem to render in the same way.

Though there is this, which seems to indicate that all
major non-IE browsers have some kind of quirks mode
worked out:

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Document/compatMode

I trust that if a page looks right
in any recent version of FF then it will look the same
in most newer/older versions, as well as in Chrome and
Safari. (Within reason. I don't use Macs, but I'd guess
that the colors, at least, don't look quite the same.)

And I trust that in quirks mode all versions of IE, 6-10,
will act the same. So that narrows it all down to 2
page versions for all browsers. Except that MS threw
a wrench in the works with IE11/Edge. Edge is broken
as an IE version and IE11 is broken unless compat
mode is set per domain, in which case it will actually
send an IE7 userAgent and act accordingly.
Tim Streater
2019-01-08 22:29:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| I don't see how you can trust
| quirks mode to render the same way in all browsers.
Not all browsers. All versions of IE, from 6-10, plus
IE11 if compatibility mode is set. Microsoft were
very considerate in providing quirks mode, which
provides an IE6-ish display, so that people who wanted
to could avoid targetting every IE version separately
with complex spaghetti code, and detailed lists of
each version's quirks. (In that sense, non-quirks
mode is the quirks mode.)
Traditional IE rendering vs Microsoft's gradually evolving
version of "standards" rendering. And it can be queried,
I dunno why you obsess about MS - they were late to the party anyway.

All browsers operate in quirks mode if you leave out the doctype. The
problem is that they don't necessarily all quirk in the same way.
That's why you should always use a doctype and preferably that for
HTML5. Personally I don't GAS if my pages look a bit different in older
versions of IE.
--
Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don't need it, and Hell
where they already have it.

Ronald Reagan
Mayayana
2019-01-08 22:59:27 UTC
Permalink
"Tim Streater" <***@greenbee.net> wrote

| I dunno why you obsess about MS - they were
| late to the party anyway.
|
Obsess? I'm just trying to support as many browsers
as possible with as little work as possible. Someone
using IE is not MS. They're a person on a computer,
trying to read pages online. This is not a political issue.
Nor is it a religious issue. It's just about functionality.

| All browsers operate in quirks mode if you leave out the doctype. The
| problem is that they don't necessarily all quirk in the same way.
| That's why you should always use a doctype and preferably that for
| HTML5.

You didn't fully read what I wrote. This isn't a
complex concept: IE has a dependable quirks mode
across versions. Firefox is different, but seems
to be the same as WebKit in my experience. So 2
code versions covers all browsers, with no need
of javascript or spaghetti code. If I use an HTML5
doctype I need to support numerous browsers
separately, which gets into a lot of research and
spaghetti code.

|Personally I don't GAS if my pages look a bit different in older
| versions of IE.
|

That's up to you. But if you don't care about older
browsers then you really don't know what you're
talking about in telling me I should use an HTML5
doctype. It's not necessarily just "a bit different".

Ironically, much of the bloated overuse of javascript
is being used to adapt to older browsers without having
to understand the code. Jquery, html5shiv, etc. It's just
a different kind of quirks mode, Rube Goldberg style.
Lewis
2019-01-08 23:53:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
You didn't fully read what I wrote. This isn't a
complex concept: IE has a dependable quirks mode
across versions. Firefox is different, but seems
to be the same as WebKit in my experience. So 2
code versions covers all browsers, with no need
of javascript or spaghetti code. If I use an HTML5
doctype I need to support numerous browsers
separately, which gets into a lot of research and
spaghetti code.
Your experiencen is obviously littered with a lot of nonesense. Firefox
has *nothing* to do with Webkit. Nothing, at all. In fact, if Firfox has
a natural enemy, it is WebKit.

SMH. this is just insane.
Post by Mayayana
|Personally I don't GAS if my pages look a bit different in older
| versions of IE.
|
That's up to you. But if you don't care about older
browsers then you really don't know what you're
talking about in telling me I should use an HTML5
doctype. It's not necessarily just "a bit different".
What you still haven't answered is why you care about the minuscule tiny
rounding error minority that are using deprecated and obsolete and
unsupported and massively exploitable browsers.
Post by Mayayana
Ironically, much of the bloated overuse of javascript
is being used to adapt to older browsers without having
to understand the code. Jquery, html5shiv, etc. It's just
a different kind of quirks mode, Rube Goldberg style.
You obviously have not clue what jQuery is, just like you had no idea
until this week what JSON was.
--
"I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a
friend.... if you have one." - GB Shaw to Churchill "Cannot possibly
attend first night, will attend second... if there is one." - Winston
Churchill, in response.
Mayayana
2019-01-09 01:54:32 UTC
Permalink
"Lewis" <***@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote

|
| Your experiencen is obviously littered with a lot of nonesense.

This discussion seems to be going downhill. I've
said my piece, at least once, for what it's worth,
so I'll quit. People are free to code as they like.
Good luck.
Lewis
2019-01-08 22:42:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| I don't see how you can trust
| quirks mode to render the same way in all browsers.
Not all browsers. All versions of IE, from 6-10, plus
You are very confused. Quirks mode is not a Micrsoft thing. It is not an
IE thing. It is how browsers try to fail graceful when ninnies write
broken HTML.
Post by Mayayana
IE11 if compatibility mode is set. Microsoft were
very considerate in providing quirks mode, which
provides an IE6-ish display, so that people who wanted
to could avoid targetting every IE version separately
with complex spaghetti code, and detailed lists of
each version's quirks. (In that sense, non-quirks
mode is the quirks mode.)
None of this is accurate. Most obviously, quirks mode is intended to be
compatible with IE 5.0, which had full support for CSS level 1. And it
is used as a failure mode for bad code, or by a browser that is not full
compatible with web standards.
Post by Mayayana
As for the other browsers, I think FF also has some
kind of quirks mode recognition, but I've never looked
into it.
Of course you haven't. So much for your claim that you "write for all
browsers"/ I mean, we knew it was absurd when you said it, but there's
proof now.
Post by Mayayana
And I know it's not the same as IE quirks mode,
because they render differently. I only know that
Mozilla/WebKit seem to render in the same way.
The definition of quirks mode is that you cannot predict how it will
render because the source is broken. It will do its best to render in
and IE5-compatible way.
Post by Mayayana
Though there is this, which seems to indicate that all
major non-IE browsers have some kind of quirks mode
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Document/compatMode
"Seems" to indicate. yeah. That's what it says.

There's a link to Quirks Mode right in the first sentence. did you read
it?

<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Quirks_Mode_and_Standards_Mode>

And there is a further link to this:

<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Mozilla_quirks_mode_behavior>
Post by Mayayana
Edge is broken as an IE version and IE11 is broken unless compat
Edge is not an IE version in anyway.
--
"Why do you sit there looking like an envelope without any address on
it?" - Mark Twain
Lewis
2019-01-07 23:27:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
Last week I was looking for some kind of code to
format JSON. I found lots of webpages that would do
it. Most were using jquery, a gigantic javascript
wrapper for people who don't know how to write
script.
No, it is for people who DO know how to write scripts and understand
the benefit of not starting from scratch every time and having a
well-betted and supported library available.
Post by Mayayana
After a lot of research I finally discovered
that I only needed one simple line of javascript in
a webpage to fornat JSON. It's built into the javascript
"engine" in browsers. That's ridiculous clutter, using
jquery to format JSON, but those webpages might
pass the W3C test.
A lot of research? Really?

The JS in JSON stands for "JavaScript".
Post by Mayayana
My examples in the post above were meant to
illustrate that many things the W3C consider errors
have reasons.
Nearly never. Effectively never. If you are intentionally writing HTML
that doesn't validate you are doing so out of ignorance, not for a
"reason".
Post by Mayayana
Changing them can sometimes break a page. It's not always a case of
overlooked errors. For example, I don't use a DOCTYPE tag. W3C
considers that an error.
Because it is an error.
Post by Mayayana
But it's deliberate. It signals quirks mode.
Which is not desirable. Quirks mode is simply you saying "I am
incompetent, please please browser try to figure out my code and do
something unpredictable with it."
Post by Mayayana
If I use an HTML5 DOCTYPE tag then
every version of IE will render the page differently.
SMH. There are other doctypes.
Post by Mayayana
That means I'd need custom code for each version.
No, it means you have to write good code to start with, and then, if you
really care about deprecated version of IE used by 0.1% of people, you
can use MSFT's idiotic IE specific comments to overcome their broken
browser.
Post by Mayayana
That's why so many webpages have spaghetti code
that reads like: <!-- If > IE7..... If > IE8..... If > IE9... etc
They're trying to be compliant and end up having to
write custom code to accommodate different browsers.
Only ancient obsolete versions of IE that no one is using anymore.
Post by Mayayana
Joy's page has several very real errors. </P><P>
Where did you get the (wrong) idea that </p> followed by a <p> is an
error?
--
The real world was far too real to leave neat little hints. It was full
of too many things. It wasn't by eliminating the impossible that you got
at the truth, however improbable; it was by the much harder process of
eliminating the possibilities. --Feet of Clay
Andy Burns
2019-01-03 09:01:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by dale
I am getting a HTML error when I use the W3C Nu checker on my site
Presumably the <script> element is not something you have included in
the page yourself, but your web host has "injected" it for you? The
comment implies that you can ask them to turn the performance monitoring
off.

The error is because any <script> elements must be within the <head> or
<body> elements and the web host has clumsily inserted it after the <body>
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...