New forum software update done

rensseak · November 16, 2011, 05:47:58 AM

Quote from: wattsup on November 15, 2011, 09:52:17 PM

@stefan just open the firefox 8.0 like mine just updated and it does not work. Works OK with IE.

test with firefox 7.0.1 on Kubuntu 11.10

for me it works all fine.

Let me google that for you

Mark69 · November 16, 2011, 09:32:13 AM

Stephan, any chance you can stop the video on the home page from auto loading and running? It is very annoying to have this happen every time one goes to the homepage.
Thanks

wattsup · November 16, 2011, 10:36:53 AM

Quote from: WilbyInebriated on November 16, 2011, 05:06:11 AM
all tags MUST be closed to validate as XHTML 1.0
this applies to
.
is correct and will validate. <img> tags would require this as well. eg: <img src='somefile.jpg' border='0' />

obviously XML and HTML are different entities, but the idea is to have your html be well-formed xml. HTML5 is getting us close. see stackoverflow for a more detailed discussion: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1946426/html-5-is-it-br-br-or-br

@WI

Thanks for your post. I still think the forward slash is just there to mix things up and should be removed.

Also, in that link you have this mentioned,

QUOTE
Very few people actually use XHTML, however. You need to serve your content as application/xhtml+xml for it to be interpreted as XHTML, and that will not work in IE (it will also mean that any small error you make will prevent your page from being displayed, in browsers that do support XHTML). So, most of what looks like XHTML on the web is actually being served, and interpreted, as HTML. See Serving XHTML as text/html Considered Harmful for some more information.
QUOTE

In the post page source there is no content being served as "application/xhtml+xml".

So if this is correct and there is no "application/xhtml+xml", then the page is not xhtml but simple html and those forward slashes should be removed accordingly.

wattsup

WilbyInebriated · November 16, 2011, 11:45:46 AM

Quote from: wattsup on November 16, 2011, 10:36:53 AM
@WI

Thanks for your post. I still think the forward slash is just there to mix things up and should be removed.

no problem. i see you are still confused. it is not to 'mix things up', it is to be xhtml compliant, which is done for various reasons. some were mentioned in the stackoverflow discussion...

Quote from: wattsup on November 16, 2011, 10:36:53 AM
Also, in that link you have this mentioned,

QUOTE
Very few people actually use XHTML, however. You need to serve your content as application/xhtml+xml for it to be interpreted as XHTML, and that will not work in IE (it will also mean that any small error you make will prevent your page from being displayed, in browsers that do support XHTML). So, most of what looks like XHTML on the web is actually being served, and interpreted, as HTML. See Serving XHTML as text/html Considered Harmful for some more information.
QUOTE

you aren't understanding the context of what is being said there. see the first and second responses to that quote at stackoverflow. especially the first one with the link to "Considered Harmful" essays considered harmful! - http://meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html

Quote from: wattsup on November 16, 2011, 10:36:53 AM
In the post page source there is no content being served as "application/xhtml+xml".

So if this is correct and there is no "application/xhtml+xml", then the page is not xhtml but simple html and those forward slashes should be removed accordingly.

wattsup

again, you aren't understanding... you are correct about there being no content served as "application/xhtml+xml" viewing the source shows us <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /> (note the />)
and this is where i think you are getting confused because the document type is
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

so to validate it you have to use XHTML 1.0 Transitional and not HTML 3.2 or HTML 4.01 or HTML5 and yet we are 'serving' a content type of "text/html". not that this site validates at all... there are all sorts of unclosed tags
and numerous others all through the site. i sure hope stephan didn't pay money for it, it's very sloppy coding. i can imagine how much care is taken with security if the coders can't even be bothered to close a simple html tag to comply with the declared document type.

edited for further clarification. hope that helps. if you need further clarification i will try and answer any questions.

hartiberlin · November 16, 2011, 02:39:37 PM

I think the XTHML errors have nothing to do with it.
I have in a few blocks only old style HTML codes, but the modern browsers
can still support this like
<center> and </center> which is not valid anymore in the XHTML specifications...

Well I think it is more related to some cookie and security settings in the new
SMF forum software version.

I now changed again some settings and will see, if these 2 pics will upload again.

New forum software update done

rensseak

Mark69

wattsup

WilbyInebriated

hartiberlin