|
From: Charles L. <cha...@gm...> - 2005-08-14 23:44:33
|
* On Sunday 2005-08-14 at 18:31:13 +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
>
> You have send it broken...
Ok. If it wasn't damaged, then we know it's
not the MUAs or the mail transport system.
> > What is the tool you are using that generates
> > this error?
> > Could it be this tool that's broken?
> > Are you using its latest version?
>
> Yes
But what's the name and specific version of this
tool from which you quoted an error message?
I'd like to be able to duplicate this myself.
> and your file seems to be:
[...]
> which is definitivly broken.
The initial segment you quoted here is indeed
intact compared to the original.
I see nothing that's so obviously broken about
it, whether from an SGML or from an HTML point
of view.
> Many Webbrowser claims about it.
I have tested the following browsers and
they have no problem with it: Firefox 1.0.6,
Konqueror 3.1.4, links 0.4.2, and w3m 0.4.1.
If the problem is at the SGML level, can you
pinpoint a specific SGML production that is not
respected by this code?
<http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/SGML/productions.html>
<ftp://ftp.ifi.uio.no/pub/SGML/productions>
Otherwise, if it's at the HTML level, can you
pinpoint something specific in the DTD (or in
the specification itself) that is not respected
by this code?
<http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd>
<http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/>
> Better you update your HTML generator.
This is handwritten.
Then successfully validated as I described using
online tools.
So I'd like to understand precisely what I am
doing wrong at the standards level, since I am
doing it manually entirely myself.
|