With point of visitors, your website might be different blocks which are
designed well and have interest of its functionality only with point of
search engine
Your visitors don’t care of back hand code of your website and just
focus on visual look and information on website where search engine
require error free pages to index your website. Validating your code
would evaluate small errors that might stop search engine to index your
all the content on web page.
Sometimes error occurred when it is viewed in different browser or
device. You would get ideas on what is require creating robust website
for all browser and device and suggestion regarding that.
Validating all code on web page make sure that all the function works
properly on your website. Sometime giving wrong input to specific
function stop works and it can be found by validation.
In some extreme conditions, due to server errors visitors can’t view the
content or access the website. You can check possible server errors can
cause in different condition.
2012-01-27 12:18, Delois wrote:
> With point of visitors, your website might be different blocks which are
> designed well and have interest of its functionality only with point of
> search engine
This looks like a translation. I think many people would prefer reading the original.
> Your visitors don t care
Your message contains an octet outside the ASCII range, yet your message headers have no character code specification. This is Usenet, not HTML, but a very similar problem occurs in web authoring. If you cannot handle this basic issue in a simple context like e-mail, are you competent in giving advice on more sophisticated authoring issues?
> search engine
> require error free pages to index your website.
A search engine that required pages to be error-free would soon be a dead search engine, even if we limit ourselves to very technical aspects of being error-free. The vast majority of web pages have HTML syntax errors, CSS syntax errors, or JavaScript code errors, not to mention incorrect semantics of tags, dysfunct links, violation of WAI rules, etc.
> Validating all code on web page make sure that all the function works
> properly on your website.
It does no such thing, even under the most liberal interpretation of "validation".
> Sometime giving wrong input to specific
> function stop works and it can be found by validation.
HTML has no functions.
> In some extreme conditions, due to server errors visitors can t view the
> content or access the website. You can check possible server errors can
> cause in different condition.
>> With point of visitors, your website might be different blocks which are
>> designed well and have interest of its functionality only with point of
>> search engine
> This looks like a translation. I think many people would prefer reading
> the original.
>> Your visitors don t care
> Your message contains an octet outside the ASCII range, yet your message
> headers have no character code specification. This is Usenet, not HTML,
> but a very similar problem occurs in web authoring. If you cannot handle
> this basic issue in a simple context like e-mail, are you competent in
> giving advice on more sophisticated authoring issues?
As a point of interest, in the op's message the ' (apostrophe) displays correctly. In your quote it displays as a diamond with a ? in the center.
-- TK ~ aka Terry Kimpling
http://wejuggle2.com/ 1729, smallest prime number - sum of two cubes, two different ways
2012-01-27 15:39, TK wrote:
>>> Your visitors don t care
>> Your message contains an octet outside the ASCII range, yet your message
>> headers have no character code specification. This is Usenet, not HTML,
>> but a very similar problem occurs in web authoring. If you cannot handle
>> this basic issue in a simple context like e-mail, are you competent in
>> giving advice on more sophisticated authoring issues?
> As a point of interest, in the op's message the ' (apostrophe) displays
> correctly.
As I explained in the text quoted above, the original message has a data error: a byte that is undefined in the implied encoding (ASCII).
> In your quote it displays as a diamond with a ? in the center.
The character (U+FFFD REPLACEMENT CHARACTER) is an adequate symbol for indicating data error. As the Unicode Standard says, it is “used to replace an incoming character whose value is unknown or unrepresentable in Unicode.” Of course I know that the OP _meant_ to use U+2019 RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK (’) there, but that’s not what the data contains.
Similarly, good browsers display to indicate character data error (a byte or byte sequence that does represent a character in the declared or implied encoding) in HTML. They may do some heuristic error recovery, though, so some common errors like using windows-1252 encoded U+2019 in data purported to be ISO-8859-1 are usually silently fixed by applying automatic switch to windows-1252. But errors don’t stop being errors just because there is error recovery.
TK <tkno...@wejuggle2.com> writes:
> On 1/27/2012 4:57 AM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>> 2012-01-27 12:18, Delois wrote:
>>> With point of visitors, your website might be different blocks which are
>>> designed well and have interest of its functionality only with point of
>>> search engine
>> This looks like a translation. I think many people would prefer reading
>> the original.
>>> Your visitors don t care
>> Your message contains an octet outside the ASCII range, yet your message
>> headers have no character code specification. This is Usenet, not HTML,
>> but a very similar problem occurs in web authoring. If you cannot handle
>> this basic issue in a simple context like e-mail, are you competent in
>> giving advice on more sophisticated authoring issues?
> As a point of interest, in the op's message the ' (apostrophe)
> displays correctly. In your quote it displays as a diamond with a ?
> in the center.
Your newsreader either guessed correctly or it happened to be set to use
a default that matched the OP’s encoding. Jukka’s newsreader presumably
did not guess correctly. The character you describe is Unicode’s
REPLACEMENT CHARACTER: “used to replace an incoming character whose
value is unknown[...]” so, in some sense, his message did display the
character correctly!
The original message had an octet whose value was 146 (hex 92). In most
Windows single-byte encodings this is a right single quote (the
preferred character to use for apostrophe, despite the name).
> > On 1/27/2012 4:57 AM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> >> 2012-01-27 12:18, Delois wrote:
...
> >> Your message contains an octet outside the ASCII range, yet your message
> >> headers have no character code specification. ...
> > As a point of interest, in the op's message the ' (apostrophe)
> > displays correctly. In your quote it displays as a diamond with a ?
> > in the center.
> Your newsreader either guessed correctly or it happened to be set to use
> a default that matched the OP’s encoding. Jukka’s newsreader presumably
> did not guess correctly. The character you describe is Unicode’s
> REPLACEMENT CHARACTER: “used to replace an incoming character whose
> value is unknown[...]”
In mine, I got, instead of the usual comma, a thinner sort of affair, not the usual font, not so jammed up to the letter on the left as usual, but near the baseline where commas like to hang out. In fact, it looked like an apostrophe that had lost the will to fly and had dropped to eke out the rest of its days among the commas and the full stops, I hope this is not going to depress me for the rest of the day.
> so, in some sense, his message did display the
> character correctly!
There is always a way of looking at things optimistically!
> The original message had an octet whose value was 146 (hex 92). In most
> Windows single-byte encodings this is a right single quote (the
> preferred character to use for apostrophe, despite the name).
