Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : DreamWeaver Flash xhtml validation


tefnut
07-13-2006, 11:00 AM
I have been making a website WC3 and have found that the code that DW produces doesn't validate in the WC3 validator, its all in lowercase. But its throwing a wobbly over things like quality, pluginspage, type. basically everything. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Thanks

Charles
07-13-2006, 11:45 AM
Forgive me for putting it this way but, What did you expect from Dreamweaver?

There's an old saying, "if you want it done right then you have to do it yourself." It's doubly true for HTML.

skilled1
07-13-2006, 12:16 PM
dreamweaver and other 'wizzywigs' or programs that do the code for you often do alot of un-needed codeing that can be called 'bloat code'. Simple examples of this is often when you slice images using adobe imageready or photoshop, it will do the table for you, but enclude 'spacer.gif' which if you know to code, you could have just placed the image in a table, and used an image map to call on the link, would have saved on load time, and code.

kelly23
07-13-2006, 12:45 PM
It's probably not what you were hoping to get as a solution, but have a look here (http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/)

tefnut
07-15-2006, 10:12 AM
I do realize that DW does a lot of unessessary code as I have been using it for about 6 years now. But the recent version of DW is supposed to be more accessible and I have never had a problem inserting stuff like images being invalid code, only if you dont keep an eye on what its doing it can do stupid things. In this case I have been inserting a flash file and the code it generates with that is what the WC3 validaotor says in incorrect almost all of the code infact apart from the embed tags. I really would like to know what is the WC3 standard code for inserting a flash file in a web page as oposed to this?


<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=7,0,19,0" width="550" height="400" accesskey="1" tabindex="1" title="test">
<param name="movie" value="file:///D|/php_course/test.swf" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<embed src="file:///D|/php_course/test.swf" quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="550" height="400"></embed>
</object>

Thanks

Charles
07-15-2006, 12:07 PM
There's an interesting article in the current edition of A List Apart:

http://www.alistapart.com/articles/byebyeembed

kiwibrit
07-15-2006, 03:27 PM
To be honest, <embed> is so simple to use, and so well supported by most browsers, that I think the w3c is wrong not to have adopted it (I know have committed heresy bysaying that). I can't see it not being supported by a main browser for a long time yet. It seems ridiculous to have to jump through hoops like the "satay" method just to obtain validation which provides no benefit for the user.

I rarely use Flash - but when I do, I use <embed> . It is the only thing I code knowing that the result will not validate.

sftrprod
07-15-2006, 06:19 PM
I remember finding that I just removed all the attributes and tags that the validator didn't agree with and it worked fine then and validated in xHTML strict.

drhowarddrfine
07-15-2006, 08:08 PM
Internet Explorer’s non-standard use of the object tag has forced standards-loving browsers to use the non-standard embed tag in order to embed movies on a web page.Just like IEs non-standard use of CSS and HTML has forced developers to use non-standard tags in order to create web pages. The problem is not the W3C.