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. |