resist
Forum Replies Created
-
Forum: Your WordPress
In reply to: Please have a look at my russian wp blogNice stuff, I like the colors. =)
Angriff.
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: New rules for CSS validation?!mine has 2 errors with
Invalid number : line-height Parse Error – [empty string]Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: New rules for CSS validation?!well, maybe it’s a problem on there side? Whats the reason for this change?
Heh, this is crazy http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwordpress.org%2Fdevelopment%2F&usermedium=all wth are they doing? Whats the reason to use their stupid validator if there is no website on the net that would be valid by such means. Mist.
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: New rules for CSS validation?!thats right, but even more – mine was absolutely fine a few DAYS ago, still xhtml valid, no problems with rss, but css says the same thing – background color and 2 errors that are not really errors, as far as know css my .css is perfectly fine. Thus, WTH?
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: New rules for CSS validation?!BTW Mentor, have you cheked this http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http://www.m3nt0r.de/blog/ ?
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: New rules for CSS validation?!that’s the point I haven’t changed anything, and did not edit the css file either, no new plugins for the last 2 months, and I’m using wordpress’ default text editor.
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: How to add an entry without showing it on the main page?the slippery plug in works, but are there any other alternatives similar to what febwa1976 pointed out?
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: XHTML 1.1 vs 1.o Strict/Transitionala valid js? interesting… how come?
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: UTF-8 in WP and European/Cyrillic textI tried a file with simple html (utf-8) and it gives me the same result as those unreadable symbols (µ�¡�‚� Ñ˜� Â°� ). So it looks like php/apache related, but Im not sure where to check.
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: XHTML 1.1 vs 1.o Strict/TransitionalI just tried the latest build of 1.6 and the editor does use align= for images, so no wonder it’s not valid 1.0 strict or 1.1…
So I think transitional is the future of WP, thus I guess I would go with it.Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: XHTML 1.1 vs 1.o Strict/TransitionalBut WP has always been out of the box 1.0 transitional valid, so I’m sure it’ll be at least that. – Probably that’s the key. I mean, it’s clear that an ordinary user of WP will not keep up with strict in any instance, so basically I understand this as WP developers want it be transitional and not planning to move to strict anytime soon, considering the logical fact of WYSIWYG editor in 1.6 (yes, yes I know it’s not a place and a time to talk about it 😉 )
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: XHTML 1.1 vs 1.o Strict/Transitional1.6? well 1.6-ALPHA-2-still-dont-use is out there, so that’s not my point. All I’m trying to do is to find a solution to the problem I face, isn’t that the purpose of this forum?
But back to the topic, can you advise me an “easy” way to keep up with strict without spending days to learn it like I know html for instance?
I know transitional is the way to go for now, but it’s like high way and low way, if you know what I mean…
thanksPS. the illustration of what Im saying is right here http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwordpress.org%2Fsupport%2Ftopic%2F42408%23post-238230 try to validate the page you are viewing right now and see what happens.
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: XHTML 1.1 vs 1.o Strict/Transitionalit’s hard to decide because I CAN handle strict but, at the same time the majority of Wp powered blogs use transitional. Besides Im not a professional designer, thus if there is a converter of some kind that would help me with strict i would go with strict. However, I still have the concern regarding wp’s future and WYSIWYG editor in 1.6. I bet at least some tags it generates are not 1.0 strict valid, Im more than sure. Does this mean WP goes Transitionl officially?
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: XHTML 1.1 vs 1.o Strict/TransitionalWell, but you think that 1.1 or 1.0 strict will be THE standard anytime soon? As podz pointed out transitional should be fine for a long, besides I found even 1.0 strict a bit confusing, for an example, I used HTML to XHTML 1.0 strict converter to convert very primitive code: <img src=”http://website.info/avatar.gif” alt=”My Avatar” align=”right” vspace=”2″ hspace=”2″> so I got this <img src=”http://website.info/avatar.gif” alt=”avatar” align=”right” vspace=”2″ hspace=”2″ /> not a big difference eh? But the funny thing, it does not validate heh. The code seems to me perfectly fine…
Forum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: XHTML 1.1 vs 1.o Strict/TransitionalSo should it be 1.1 by any chance? I mean whats the difference and whats the reasoning behind using it at wp.org? (just wondering 😉 )
And if I use 1.0 strict or 1.1 strict, well… as I presume – WYSIWYG in 1.6 would give me some trouble right?
Tnanks
