php4 and encoded ampersands (was Re: [WSG] google and validation)

2008-10-20 Thread Michael MD
not a third party on the planet that knows how to write a valid script tag or encode ampersands... I've sometimes had to modify existing php and perl scripts to handle encoded ampersands. It seems that neither php 4's $_GET or $_REQUEST nor perl's param handle encoded ampersands in query

Re: php4 and encoded ampersands (was Re: [WSG] google and validation)

2008-10-20 Thread David Dorward
Michael MD wrote: not a third party on the planet that knows how to write a valid script tag or encode ampersands... I've sometimes had to modify existing php and perl scripts to handle encoded ampersands. It seems that neither php 4's $_GET or $_REQUEST nor perl's param handle encoded

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-19 Thread Ben Buchanan
Hi, I am just curious how many people in this list actually spend extra time making a validation error free page for the sake of validation when third party's code is embedded. Surely the above example is an easy fix, but how about embedding google calendar or other scripts? Wherever

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-19 Thread Brett Patterson
So, Gunlaug, in essence, (essence being the operative word), you do validate your site by using tidy? Correct? I mean if you trust tidy to correct your code and all the code that tidy puts out is, as you say, 99.9% effective then that is kinda like validating, right? And Ben, are you saying you

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-19 Thread tee
On Oct 18, 2008, at 8:07 PM, Brett Patterson wrote: I understand what you are saying to a degree. But what YOU don't understand is that by validating a page, you are more ensured that your page will work for everyone. So it is an easy fix, but it has nothing to do with embedding Google

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-19 Thread Ben Buchanan
And Ben, are you saying you validate or not? I aim for sites to validate unless there's an immovable reason why not (unmodifiable third party code, legally locked code, unable to prevent users creating errors, etc). So I suppose for your scenario the simpler answer is just yes, because the code's

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-19 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun
Brett Patterson wrote: So, Gunlaug, in essence, (essence being the operative word), you do validate your site by using tidy? Correct? I mean if you trust tidy to correct your code and all the code that tidy puts out is, as you say, 99.9% effective then that is kinda like validating, right?

[WSG] google and validation

2008-10-18 Thread designer
Hello all, A client wants a link to google maps to shows where a property is located (there are 30+ properties, so 30+ pages with links to google maps). The trouble is, the pages no longer validate because of the url needed to get to the map. An example is: a

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-18 Thread Svip
Care to tell us what exactly the validator tells you is wrong? /Svip 2008/10/18 designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello all, A client wants a link to google maps to shows where a property is located (there are 30+ properties, so 30+ pages with links to google maps). The trouble is, the pages no

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-18 Thread designer
From: Svip To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Care to tell us what exactly the validator tells you is wrong? /Svip 2008/10/18 designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello all, A client wants a link to google maps to shows where a property is located (there are 30+ properties, so 30+ pages with links to

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-18 Thread Hassan Schroeder
designer wrote: which refers to the '=' before the utf8. Or is it all that cause the problem? That single URL finds 24 errors altogether. Did you change them all? Because that's all I had to do to make your sample validate... -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-18 Thread Brett Patterson
This is a good question. I would recommend the following page to view. http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/problems.html#amp Here is the code that works for me: a href=

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-18 Thread tee
On Oct 18, 2008, at 12:20 PM, Brett Patterson wrote: This is a good question. I would recommend the following page to view. http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/problems.html#amp Here is the code that works for me: a

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-18 Thread Brett Patterson
I understand what you are saying to a degree. But what YOU don't understand is that by validating a page, you are more ensured that your page will work for everyone. So it is an easy fix, but it has nothing to do with embedding Google calendar or other scripts. It is just a link. Whereas embedding

Re: [WSG] google and validation

2008-10-18 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun
tee wrote: Hi, I am just curious how many people in this list actually spend extra time making a validation error free page for the sake of validation when third party's code is embedded. Surely the above example is an easy fix, but how about embedding google calendar or other scripts? I