Valid HTML?

How many infusions/mods? What theme are you using? Those can all contribute to errors.

Hit the W3C HTML 4.01 button in the awards panel (right) the results were pretty darn good last time I checked!

You're right, I didn't think about the theme. I don't really have any mods.

aquarian: hit the button again.

Don't feel bad...the themes site has over 600, yahoo.com has over 270, google had 52 :D.

The invalid HTML is in the "Hosted by" left hand panel.

Failed validation, 1 error

Lucky you, my sites get between 78 & 241 errors, a majority being
required attribute "ALT" not specified
(will take a long time but I'll find out where they are),

but also many other types I can't understand and could use a little help for :
end tag for element "INPUT" which is not open
like in
<input type='submit' name='sa' value='Rechercher !'></input>
or
Error Line 232 column 18: there is no attribute "BEHAVIOR"
like in
<marquee behavior='scroll' align='center' valign='bottom' direction='up' width='


Edit : deleted the superlong url...

Its all in the themes.

My site does not validate, but my test site does, only difference is a W3C compliant theme.

www.test.01243.co.uk to check. (PS ot checked since latest version upgrade but it was valid before that.

Doesn't look so...

Have a look at the attached zip, it's where some of the alt='' were needed simply for 'blank.gif' or 'bullet.gif'.

And there's more I haven't found yet.

But for one, none is in the Themes...

I also have a feeling W3C does not recognize ' for "... when I see
I wonder what's wrong...

<input type='submit' name='sa' value='Rechercher !'></input>

You dont need to close input tags. Theres no such tag as </input>

:D ROFLOL
I did not create anything, man - I wish I knew how to -, that's your baby ;)

lol!

My site is completely valid, unless I add a new feature/panel... then I have to re-valid it (which takes HOURS)

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=www...s.com/corp

- k3p7 B)

Any tips you'd like to share on where to look or what to look for?
I have lots of panels...
I know W3C is somewhat an outdated thing but people seem to like it...

Edit:
also from your HTML source some tags pass on your site and not on mine, like where not ALT is specified?

w3c is outdated?!
No!
The Browsers are outdated, W3C is the source of HTML Innovations. If all browsers would feature at least full CSS 2 which is out for years now, Webdesign and Structuring of Content would be so wonderful.

To get W3C compliancy, you need to care about these points:
-Close all tags, that have a closing tag
-Use CSS instead of HTML for Stylling
-Use non empty ALT Attributes in every image tag
-Don't open body, title. head or html tags inside your website twice or more
-Don't use unofficial or browser-specific tags (<marquee>, <nobr> )
-use the html writing of characters, such as & instead of &
...

Well, before converting my sites to fusion, most of them passed validation easily... now my main site had about 80 errors and it took real time to find them. Most of them in infusions and / or mods, but some (ALT attributes mainly) in the core.

This site is now fully compliant... took half a day to achieve and a headache to replace a vertical scroll marquee...

As to my opinion that this is outdated, some people share it.
See this example:
http://www.themaninblue.com/writing/p...004/10/14/
You might like to know that some large companies with active sites do not comply:
*Adobe
*Apple
*eBay
*Google
*Microsoft

Today, event if I don't like the idea, I cannot afford not to be I.E. compatible. What I care about is giving my visitors the features they expect, and I have to standardize on I.E. first, then Firefox, then the rest when time is available.
If I had to chose between W3C and the marquee I wanted, I would have chosen the marquee working fine under I.E. & F.F....

My view of W3C Standards is that the internet could develop in even more advanced shapes, browsers could develop faster and more people could benefit from the internet.
Web Development would be way more easier, if every dev and every browser would use the same, W3C, standard, as you would not need to care about browserspecific behaviour and thus don't need the ton of work arounds it takes you now even for simple things as displaying a png images correctly.
The reason why browsers would develop faster, if everyone would follow w3c standards is, that developers of browsers could concentrate on implementing new html features designed by the World Wide Web Consortium instead of implementing outdated tags and attributes, because so many people still use them. Wouldn't it be cool to have CSS2 features like max- and min-width or -height or sound output of text or counters or outlines, etc. (everything suggested html features, but only supported by opera of safari if at all).
From Features like optional voice output of texts and image descriptions, the internet would open up for many kinds of people, who cannot use the current system. Additionaly, it would make the internet more comfortable for everybody, too.
Of course, some points of the W3C standards are overshot and if you want to have a marquee, noone cares if you do so. But it's important to understand the basic idea. The World Wide Web Consortium tries to improve the possibilties of the Internet and to spread the possibility to use the Internet.
That's why you should not just shrug the W3C and it's standard off as a outdated crap.

:) maybe, but the real world is: one can't bypass I.E., that IS the standard...

what's the connection between following W3C standards and bypassing IE?
My Themes should all (at least I'm sure about the ones from the last year. Used a different validator before) be valid HTML and CSS and you can view them in IE, can't you?

Sure. But they do not have color scrollbars, etc... ;)