Validator W3C, CSS3 and Bootstrap

I have a website that uses the Twitter Bootstrap framework, which displays error free in all browsers. However, when I connect the main URL of our site to the W3C validator, it spills out 1465 errors, most of which analyze errors.

A few examples:

Analysis error {* zoom: 1; Error value: background-color Too many values ​​or values ​​not recognized: # 3f6998 \ 000009

I understand that * and \ 000009 are specific IEs, so is it important that they do not validate?

Is there a validator that takes them into account?

+7
css3 twitter-bootstrap w3c-validation
source share
2 answers

When using CSS3, you will always get a CSS validation error. Most styles (css3) are currently invalid according to w3 rules. You can simply ignore these errors and move forward. Just make sure you have no other validation issues other than those that have css3 styles. If so, then you are perfectly fine.

Update:

You can try something like this:

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css3&uri=PATH_TO_YOUR_WEBSITE 

For example,

/qaru.site / ...

However, he will show a lot of mistakes. CSS3 validators that are accepted have not yet been implemented.

[Update]

URL: https://validator.w3.org/

Please use the official validator.

+9
source share

Here is an example of Bootstraps for their validation errors:

http://getbootstrap.com/getting-started/#support-validators

To provide the best experience for older and buggy browsers, Bootstrap uses CSS browser browsers in several places to customize CSS for specific versions of the browser to bypass errors in the browsers themselves. These hacks, for obvious reasons, make CSS validators complain that they are invalid. In two places, we also use painstaking CSS features that are not yet fully standardized, but they are used exclusively for progressive improvement. These validation warnings do not matter in practice, since the non-hacker part of our CSS fully checks and the hacker parts do not interfere with the proper functioning of the non-hacker part, so we deliberately ignore these specific warnings.

+1
source share

All Articles