Hello, this site had 120 error, I was able to correct 8 of them by my own. There are still many... and I have no idea how to correct them....


please help...

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...alidator%2F1.2

Line 76, Column 16: there is no attribute "property"
<meta property="og:site_name" content="Glamourina blog o modzie"/>

This looks like the page was created using some kind of comercial generator. What program did you use? The meta tag can have "name" and "content" but not "property" as attributes.


Line 130, Column 12: ID "menu-nav" already defined <div id="menu-nav">

On line 120, you already have something with an ID of "menu-nav" and every ID *must* be unique. Change one of them plus any CSS and script that references them.


Line 160, Column 46: there is no attribute "size"
…***="google_plus_one"><g:plusone size="medium" count="true" url="http://glamou…

There is no tag "<g:plusone" and, therefore, no size attribute. Again, it looks like you used a page generator that has bugs.


Multiple errors listed having to do with that "<g:plusone" thing.


Line 245, Column 9: an attribute value specification must be an attribute value literal unless SHORTTAG YES is specified
<a href=http://glamourina.pl/pierscionek-motyl/>

You need quotes around the href value.


Many more errors listed where href or src values should be quoted.


Fix all of the above and similar items on the rest of your page and then test again.

Thank you,

for the there is no attribute "property" and there is no attribute "size" I don't know if we can do something. They are facebook like button (or google +1 button) scripts... FB/google provide this kind of codes.


Line 130, Column 12: ID "menu-nav" already defined <div id="menu-nav">
I will work on this



Line 245, Column 9: an attribute value specification must be an attribute value literal unless SHORTTAG YES is specified
I corrected these errors.


I still don't see the changes reflected in the w3c validator, maybe I'll have to wait for their cache to expire.


Do you see any other errors apart from things with g: or og: in the code?
__________________

you have 2 ids the same name: <div id="menu-nav">

you cannot have more than one "id" of the same name in the same page

you can have have div style="menu-nav" as many times as you like but you can't replicate "id" names on the same page.

sorry didnt notice you already posted this, was about to check them all lol

You have fixed some problems; see the rest here: http://validator.w3.org/check?charse...glamourina.pl/

You don't need to wait for "w3 cache" to clear to revalidate. Go to the following url and put in your site address: http://validator.w3.org/

I dropped all errors specificaly stated as og: or g: or fb: and found quite a list remaining. I'll attempt to answer some of them below. Please fix these before writing back so that we don't go over the same problems multiple times.


Line 98, Column 48: document type does not allow element "div" here;

A div is block mode, but you have used it within an inline item.


Line 130, Column 12: ID "menu-nav" already defined

Each ID MUST BE UNIQUE. This ID was already used on line 120.


Line 160, Column 72: there is no attribute "url"

This might be an og: or not.


Line 245, Column 9: an attribute value specification must be an attribute

Check every point where there is an href= or src= item and put quote marks around the string of characters immediately after the equals sign. There a multiples of these.


Line 245, Column 64: required attribute "alt" not specified

The DOCTYPE you have chosen demands that every image must have an alt attribute. Some people think this type of error is not worth fixing and some fix it by putting in a dummy value like alt="*" but you should put in a short description of the image in case the user has images turned off.

Thank you!!

It really looks there is some problem with the w3c validator.
I corrected that error yesterday. In the source code the quotes are visible, but the w3c validator is not reading the site live, but is using some cached version.

Do you know maybe why?

oh, now the validator updated itself and I can see around 80 errors. goood