First of all, the calendarscript calendars I use are wonderful and are doing everything I want them to do. So my question is not a criticism in any way.
But here's the question:
I know that html and php, which contain script includes, will not be able to be validated by the W3C HTML validator.
However, will the default.html templates and other html documents used in Calendarscript be updated at any point to include doctype information and to be as clean as possible (i.e. meet W3C standards for any given html doctype).
I only ask this because my Web administrator is troubled by the fact that the Web pages I am creating have multiple validation errors. I have explained to him that the pages I code, minus the cgi calendar script, do validate, but that validation of script includes (including the cgi calendar script) is not possible.
I have been inside the default.html coding of my calendars and do notice that there are "errors" in the html coding, such as no doctype specs, no quotes around some of the attributes, possible errors in nesting, and things like that.
I can go in and fix some of the things like that, but I feel that because there is so much more than just the default.html involved, that I won't be able to tackle the entire thing — without breaking the script — which I definitely wouldn't want to do.
What are your thoughts on this concern of my Web administrator? Have you considered these issues as you have developed the calendar script? What areas could/should I take a look at to make the html code as clean as possible?
Once again, the calendar is terrific and I fully intend to keep on using it!
Thanks for any feedback.
Shelley
PS This is the original message and not a reply. I apparently timed out when trying to post this the first time.
Setup and Installation
