<h2 align="center" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">WE ARE IMAGINATION</h2>

SHOULD BE

<h2> align="center" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">WE ARE IMAGINATION</h2>

    Sorry, but it still gives the same mistake :
    Line 78, column 8: document type does not allow element "H2" here; missing one of "APPLET", "OBJECT", "MAP", "IFRAME", "BUTTON" start-tag
    <h2> align="center" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"> text...</h2>

          ^

      Originally posted by shawon22
      <h2 align="center" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">WE ARE IMAGINATION</h2>

      SHOULD BE

      <h2> align="center" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">WE ARE IMAGINATION</h2>

      yeah that's gonna work, LOL, putting the tag attributes outside the tag itself

      anyway...back to problem

      i took your code and even only used the <h2> itself, and it freaked, maybe something about embedding the <h2> tag inside the <font> tag

        the problem is...it has to be a start-tag..i just dont know which...
        i tried div..didnt' work..i tried spam..didn't work either..out of ideas.
        It can't work with <font..cause font isnt' a start tag...
        HELP?

          Originally posted by soniared2002
          the problem is...it has to be a start-tag..i just dont know which...
          i tried div..didnt' work..i tried spam..didn't work either..out of ideas.
          It can't work with <font..cause font isnt' a start tag...
          HELP?

          its span not spam 😉
          did u try the P tag. trying to validate for XHTML 1.1 ?

            6 days later

            Post your future questions relating to HTML and XHTML at: EchoEcho.Com's User Forums.

            This, is a valid XHTML 1.0 solution to your probelm:

            <?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!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" xml:lang="en" lang="en">

<head>
<title>Example</title>
</head>

<body>
<table>
<tr>
<td width="282" bgcolor="#000000" align="left" valign="top"> 
<h2 align="center" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0;
font-family: courier; color: #E090CE;">WE ARE IMAGINATION</h2> 
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

              the w3c's errors aren't entirely logical for a normal human -- but ya, putting the <font> inside the <h2> should do the trick.

              hth
              moon

                It's perfectly logial. h2 is a Heading 2 tag and is similar to the <p> tag. What you did is the equivilent of:

                <font><a>text</a></font>
                OR
                <font><p>text</p></font>

                Which just isn't right for HTML, but may be valid for previous versions of HTML such as HTML 4.01, but XHTML 1.1 (which is like HTML 5.1, but with the characteristics of XML, thus the name XHTML) definately wouldn't allow this.

                Rightly pointed out, Moonglobe, it may not be ENTIRELY logical, but there is logic behind it.

                  actually, you're wrong about version numbers. XHTML 1.0 is identical to HTML 4.01 with the exeption of requiring short end tags to empty elements (br, hr, img, etc.) and case restrictions. and XHTML 1.1 is completely different, it's a modularly built system which simple includes several modules into a default DocType.

                    Are you sure? What are your sources?

                    I always explain XHTML to new comers needing help as "HTML 5 in disguse". Allow me to ellaborate: XHTML is the new version of HTML, created to eventuallly replace it. So called "HTML 5" is called XHTML because it has been recreated to be based on XML.

                    If I am wrong, I would be very intersted to hear the truth (with proof from W3C Documentation, if possible, to back up your claim) as I have started writing an article/tutorial about the difference of XHTML and HTML.

                    Remember, my description of XHTML as "HTML 5 in disguse" is simply an analogy, it is not officially correct.

                      to quote the XHTML 1.0 Technical Recomendation (viewable here):

                      This specification defines the Second Edition of XHTML 1.0, a reformulation of HTML 4 as an XML 1.0 application, and three DTDs corresponding to the ones defined by HTML 4. The semantics of the elements and their attributes are defined in the W3C Recommendation for HTML 4. These semantics provide the foundation for future extensibility of XHTML. Compatibility with existing HTML user agents is possible by following a small set of guidelines.

                      essentially, you are correct in the fact that the W3C has given up on HTML. HTML 4.01 is as far as HTML is going to go, and they have already started work on XHTML 2.0 (a Working Draft). i havent looked at this specification yet, so i cant tell you anything about it, but it proves my point that XHTML compliance is what any good web developer should be stiving for, and NOT just HTML 4.01 compliance. IMHO 😉

                      hope that explains things a little better
                      moon

                        5 days later

                        Hey, I'm almost finished an article that I'm writing about XHTML. I havn't checked anything with the W3C due to lack of bandwidth allowance, but it's replanished now because of the new month.

                        So, before I go around finalising the article, would you like to have a look at it and tell me what you think? Your input would be much appreciated, as you seem to be very familiar with XHTML.

                        The quote was helpful, but I am wondering why with XHTML 1.1, there is only one Doctype, IE: there is not Frameset, Transitional or Strict?

                        Link: http://www.palominoweb.com/eedev/html2xhtml/

                        😃

                          bandwidth: you'd have to have some pretty tight resrtictions; the w3c TRs are almost PURE text. and they're even broken up into little bits for you..😉

                          as for me being very familiar: well, i guess you could say that, but not really, i just enjoy reading technical docs for some reason..... heh i have made all my pages XHTML 1.1 compliant though, but it took some doing........but mainly just good use of CSS.

                          looking it over: good read, i guess the HTML 5 analogy isn't bad if you're trying to be simplistic; just realize that its almost exactly the same as HTML 4.01. everything else seems evr well done, but the background colour could be a bit lighter...

                          as for the one doctype, i think that the W3C was trying to make XHTML 1. very general-- they figure if you want more tags you can mak a module for them. which wouldn't be too hard, just a waste of time for most people-- i didnt have to change a thing from XHTML 1.0 Strict to XHTML 1.1.

                          hth
                          moon

                            Okay, thanks. I'll make some changes. I'm looking at the W3C documentation now, and it's becoming more clear.

                            I was a sucker for wasting time reading the documentation on SVG. SVG is so cool, in my opinion, better than Flash for animation and vectors, etc. Have you been following the SVG Development?

                            As for the bandwidth, we had used all of our 1GB limit except for 1MB, which means if I connected to the Internet, some other programs across our LAN might try to do things and then waste away our 1MB in a flash. Talk about milking it, we used 99.9% of our limit! Literally!

                            The Design is just the crappy, no bs, simplistic design for my articles. I left it in Times New Roman because it's easier to read (for me), and the blue isn't so hard on my eyes when I'm typing it. The article will actually appear on EchoEcho.Com and LearnWebPages.Com when it's finished.

                            Well, thanks for the input, I better go do some work...

                              hehehe....... well, not really followed it..... the only way i found put about it was downloading a free trial of Jasc Web Draw. pretty good program, imo, and its got a source view for things you can't do with a mouse. but ya it is very cool, and if i knew how to hand-code it well then i might try using it, but i think it's a bot too complex for anything more than simple images. besides, im not sure, ive only tested in Firebird an IE6, but it seems IE is the only broswer currently supporting the standard, and even then, you can't use them in <img src="" /> tags, so they're not very useful to me.

                                Actually, to my surprise aswell, you can use SVG graphics in <img> tags and as background images:

                                <table style="background-image: url(foo.svg);">

                                You can also do all sorts of fancy server-side things with conversions to raster. You can see my discussion about SVG for more info, I think I mention it there. If you want to know where I found this out, I will have to go searching through the W3C's mass of documentation again...

                                I think you have convinced me to download Jasc Web Draw. Never heard of it until now.

                                • Damo

                                  Hi all,
                                  Since the echo forms (as suggested earler in the messages) doest' work.. i am posting my question here:
                                  WHy this gives me an w3c error:
                                  <body bgcolor="#dfd5dd" topmargin="0" leftmargin="0" >
                                  It says taht topmargn/leftmargin shouldn't be there..the question is..how would i specify otehrwise no margins????
                                  thanx
                                  Sofia

                                    how would i specify otehrwise no margins????

                                    Have you tried using CSS instead?

                                      are you not gettin an error for bgcolor as well? what doctype are you using?

                                        i have the same problem as soniared2002.

                                        Example 1:

                                        Line 34, column 17: there is no attribute "vAlign"
                                        <td vAlign="top" align="left">

                                        Example 2:


                                        Line 49, column 36: there is no attribute "colSpan" (explain...).
                                        <td bgcolor="#1C3048" colSpan="3" width="100%">

                                        Example 3:

                                        Line 47, column 33: there is no attribute "height" (explain...).
                                        <table width="100%" height="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">

                                        This is my doctype:

                                        <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
                                        <html dir="ltr" lang="en">
                                        <head>
                                        <title>page</title>

                                        <meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache" />
                                        <meta http-equiv="Expires" content="-1" />
                                        <meta http-equiv="Cache-Control" content="no-cache" />
                                        <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />
                                        </head>

                                        how do i even find out what doctype i should be ising? Any good links?
                                        Any ideas?