HTML: The Definitive Guide, 3rd Edition by Chuck Musciano and Bill Kennedy The unconfirmed error reports are from readers. They have not yet been approved or disproved by the author or editor and represent solely the opinion of the reader. This page was updated March 1, 2004. Here's a key to the markup: [page-number]: serious technical mistake {page-number}: minor technical mistake : important language/formatting problem (page-number): language change or minor formatting problem ?page-number?: reader question or request for clarification UNCONFIRMED errors and comments from readers: (9) 1st full paragraph: The URL for W3C is: http://www.w3.org [43] last item on HTML list: You include in a list of "HTML tags that do not have corresponding ending tags," and on page 437 no end tag is indicated, but in Desktop Reference fold out and on pg. 525, is followed by . Which is correct? {46} 1st full paragraph: The text states that comments MUST contain spaces following "". This is incorrect. First of all, according to the W3C documentation: http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.2.4 "" are not in fact comment delimiters. The "comment declaration" starts with "". This structure contains zero or more comments. The comment delimiters themselves are "--". So the following contains 2 comments: Furthermore, the W3C documentation says that a space following "" is allowed. The 2-comment example above works fine in both Netscape Navigator 4 and IE 4. *FYI. The above W3C link crashed my Windows 95 PC twice when I tried viewing it with Nav 4. It worked fine with IE4. (48) Section 3.5.1.2, second paragraph: Now reads: "ja" (Japanese), and "hi" (Hindu). Should read: "ja" (Japanese), and "hi" (Hindi). Note "Hindi" vs. "Hindu" typo. {49} Top of page in constant-width font: the SGML reads: however, the www.w3.org says at http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/intro/sgmltut.html that the tag should read: (Note the missing slash after W3C, 4.0 is now 4.01, and html40 is now html4) (57) 3.9 The Tag, first paragraph: "These language-related attributes, then, may effect some display characteristics" should be "These language-related attributes, then, may AFFECT some display characteristics" {84-85} Concerning ^{and _{, it is written that the text is displayed
"half a character's height higher [or lower], but in the same font and size as
the current text flow." That is not what I find. For example,

1999^{1999¹⁹⁹⁹}

produces incorrect results in Internet Explorer 4.0 (version 4.72.3110). The
first superscript is a smaller font size. The superscript of the superscript
is in the same size AND AT THE SAME HEIGHT as the first superscript! On the
other hand, Netscape 4.5 produces a nice result, but still each subsequent
superscript is at a smaller and smaller size, as well as being raised.

I tried to kludge Internet Explorer into doing the right thing by altering the
SIZE of the final superscript, but it appears that Explorer steadfastly
refuses to acknowledge a nested instance of
^{. Bummer.

(86) In Table 4-2:
display style strike should have a line through the word strike.
display style underline should be underlined if these items are to conform
with the rest of the entries.

(163) 5.5.1.1:

Describes the tag takes the attribute of ALIGN (values TOP MIDDLE
BOTTOM) - I do not think the tag takes an ALIGN attribute.

It has no effect when I try it (viewed with IE 5) and the Mircrosoft Website
does not list it as an attribute of .

FYI The Microsoft website page with this information may be found at:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/reference/objects/
MARQUEE.asp

Of course Microsoft does not indicate which version of IE the elements listed
are for (4.0 -5.0 ??), so it may simply have been eliminated in the 5.0
version of IE.

{173} 6.1.1.3, 2n para:

"in pixels"

should be

"in pixels or percentage"

(as you state in 6.2.1.3, page 179, end of para 1).

(182) The Javascript command:

warning.visibility = show;

should read:

warning.visibility = "show";

(188} On line -7 (6.3.1.6):

"in pixels"

should be

"in pixels or percentage"

(as you state in 6.2.1.3, page 179, end of para 1).

{195} First paragraph:
should read: "h, t, t, p, colon, slash, slash, w, w, w, dot, widgets, dot,
com" (The 1st dot was missing.)

{221} last line:

Text says "Mosaic as shown in Figure 7-4" but Figure 7-4 (on page 222)
displays Internet Explorer icon instead of Mosaic icon.

{231} HTML fragment near end of subsection 7.5.4.2:
Change "75,75,99,99" to "50,50,99,99" if you really mean the 100x100 image's
lower-right quadrant.

{231} second paragraph under subsection 7.5.4.3 and associated HTML fragment:
Text says "lower-left quarter" but fragment says "75,75,99,99" (which is the
lower-right eighth of a 100x100 image. If you really mean the lower-left
quadrant, the fragment should say "0,50,50,99". If you want the lower-right
quadrant, change the text from "lower-left" to "lower-right" and change the
fragment to "50,50,99,99".

{234} subsection 7.5.5:
HTML fragment implies juice on left and soup in center of image. Figure 7-7
shows soup on left and juice in center.

{241} 2nd paragraph:
The book states quite clearly: "you can make the base URL relative, not
absolute." Not according to the W3C HTML 4.0 specification (24/4/1998
revision) which states: "href = uri [CT] This attribute specifies an
***absolute URI*** that acts as the base URI for resolving relative URIs." (My
emphasis.)

My own tests with relative hrefs confirm this.

(254) 1st example:
The sixth line of the example:

H1: {color: blue; font-style: italic}

has a superfluous colon. It should read:

H1 {color: blue; font-style: italic}

{271} In the 1st para:

"IE 4.0, ... in the spring of 1997"

should be updated to:

(IE and N support CSS1 and partly CSS2)

[271] 2nd paragraph or 1st full paragraph:
Book refers to a separate "compliance document" on how style sheets are
implemented by latest browser releases. It says to look for the document at
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/9781565924925.

When I went to that URL, I saw a description of the book, but no link to the
document. Where is it?

(271) 3rd para:
"all the components" should be changed since this chapter didn't cover ALL
components (e.g. cursor, multi columns, MS special filters).

{273} Delete 9.1.2.1 "you may omit the type attribute ...": type has to be
used.

{273} 9.1.2.2:
last para needs to be updated since N4 and IE4 so support the media attribute,
though only partly.

{274} 9.1.3.1:
http://www.kumquats.com/styles/gen_styles.css gives error 404.

{284} section 9.2.4.5, last line of first indented code block:

The line reads:

A.fancy:active {text-weight: bold; font-size: 150%}

I think it should be FONT-weight, and not TEXT-weight.

{285} On line -1 (9.3.1.2):

"in pixels"

should be

"in pixels or percentage"

(as you state in 6.2.1.3, page 179, end of para 1).

{286} On line 5:

"in pixels"

should be

"in pixels or percentage"

(as you state in 6.2.1.3, page 179, end of para 1) and change "two" in line 3
to "three".

{286} 1st para:
Since pixels are relative they should be removed from 1st line and "three"
should be changed to "two".

{289} 9.3.3.2, 1st para, 2nd line:
Since pixels are relative they should be removed from 1st line and "three"
should be changed to "two".

(291) In row 7:

... with an extra 24 points of space between ...

Should be 48 points.

{292} The last para of 9.3.4.2 should be removed since N4 does support
background-color.

{293} The last para of 9.3.4.4 should be removed since N4 does support
background-color.

{297} 2nd para of 9.3.5.2:
Percentage and scaling factor are relative.

{308} 2nd last para of 9.3.6.10:
N4 does support margin.

{309} Last sentence of 9.3.6.11:
N4 does support margin.

(311) In the last row:

[width property, 9.3.8.1]

should be display property.

{321,325} It mentions that and are required for tag.
But I don't think they are required. The parameters can be passed through
hyperlink to a ASP file without a submit buttom.

For example,

&action=up">

The parameters can be passed without a submit buttom!

{325} Section 10.2.3:

"in the HTML 4.0"

should read either

"in HTML 4.0" or "in the HTML 4.0 standard"

"browser may chose to"

should read

"browser may choose to"

"The default value of this attribute is unknown, implying
that form character set is the same as the document
containing the form."

should read

"The default value of this attribute is unknown, implying
that the form character set is the same as that for the
document containing the form."

(327) 1st paragraph:
The following sentence contains a double negation (cannot not) which is surely
not intended (?):

Before id was introduced in HTML 4.0, Netscape used the
name attribute to achieve similar effects, although it
cannot not be used in a hyperlink.

(331) second bullet in subsection 10.4.1:
Change "including as some versions" to "including some versions".

(348) 3rd. par:

"This the most useful way"

should read

"This is the most useful way"

{359} legend box;
In the box, it now reads:

End Tag:
; may be omitted

This should be:

End Tag:
; never omitted

Also, the "Contains", and "Used In" info needs correction also.

{365} 10.11.2.1:
Using named parameters with GET applications ---- in the code:
I get errors while compiling the code in the

TYPEDEF Struct (char *name;
char *val;
}entry;
^------------

Should read Entry (case sensitive).

Also, the program SHOULD return a value, at least a RETURN();.

Also, while linking with previous corrections made:

Linking ECHOHTML.EXE:
Linker Error: Undefined symbol _makeword in module ECHOHTML.C
Linker Error: Undefined symbol _unescape_url in module ECHOHTML.C
Linker Error: Undefined symbol _plustospace in module ECHOHTML.C

(380) last paragraph of subsection 11.2.2.2:

"Neither dir nor lang are yet supported"

should be changed to

"Neither dir nor lang is yet supported."

(400) last sentence in subsection 11.3.8:

"Internet Explorer support"

should be changed to

"Internet Explorer supports"

(406) Third line from the top, after the number 4:
I think it should read "supported" instead of "sport", right?

[413] Inset box:
The end tag occurs in various places: under the description of the
frame element, the quick reference on p.511 and the attached card.

However, it cannot be produced from the grammar or DTD, and on page 43 is
explicitly said not to exist.

It's an unfortunate error, as it suggests that omitting the tag is sloppy
HTML, whereas actually the reverse is true.

[430]}}}