Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Arse&Hemi

Protest

Recommended Posts

tbh i wish people would keep their listings plain and simple, without all the fancy shmanzi useless stuff that only makes the page load slower and unusable for most people that try using it in the field on a cell phone, PDA etc, we can't all afford an iPhone or blackberry

 

 

But,but... That's part of the Fun! Actually all of my 10 caches have HTML code in them and don't seem to be affected by the new design. As for in the field use they come down with the necessary info on my PN-20 but I did have to edit the last one a little to get some critical info moved up so it wasn't truncated in the description.

 

The only problem I have with the new layout is the excess white space and the extra long scroll to get from the top to the first of the logs. Also the code/decode information seemed just fine in the old location.

 

My 2 cents. :lol:

 

FWIW Mine are hand coded in the editing page on geocaching.com.

Edited by jaroot

Share this post


Link to post
Try it yourself.

 

ETA: None of the errors was in the user-generated portion of the page. They are all in the Groundspeak code. And yes, they are really errors.

I did. Did you read the errors? Most of what they are calling errors are not from what I can tell. Some referred to the "wid" tag. The GC web site understands what that is, but W3C does not. W3C says the "=" after the "wid" tag should be an ampersand. I don't think so. For that same "=" sign, it says "reference to entity "wid" for which no system identifier could be generated". What follows "wid=" is the unique web site generated waypoint identification number. It works just fine. Looks like that isn't an error to me either. One of my favorites is where it says that ID numbers cannot use a number to start a name. Sure it can! All of our ID's are numbers (mine is 3512 as you can see on the left if you mouse over my nickname) and the web site handles that information properly. I saw five errors on that alone. How about this one 'cannot generate system identifier for general entity "J"' where it is referring to 'Thanks, T&J (Scoobywatchers)' Wow, we all now have to sign our logs on the site so they pass the almighty W3C test? Oh the humanity!!! I can go on an on.

 

Fizzy, did you actually look at the errors? :lol:

And no, they are not all really errors.

 

I ran my web site through that wonder engine.

Line 123, Column 20: Attribute "BACKGROUND" is not a valid attribute. Did you mean "background"?

			<td background="images/leftnavback.gif" width="175" valign="top">

Um, I do have the word background in all lower case letters. Looks like W3C has problems there.

 

Attribute "W" is not a valid attribute. Did you mean "onkeydown" or "onmousedown"?

				<p><csobj w="175" h="22" t="Button" ht="images/leftnavmain2.gif"><a href="i

Um, well, "w" is a valid attribute for a column width. Geez. Pretty basic stuff there. It did not like the fact that I did not have "ALT" tags on some of my images. Boy, that's a show stopper.

 

Fizzy, your web site has errors too, some equally as incorrectly indicated. If W3C is incorrect with respect to your own web site, doesn't it seem that it could also be incorrect on Groundspeak's?

 

Looks like W3C needs to do some updating of its own. You tell me.

Edited by mtn-man

Share this post


Link to post

Did you read the errors? Most of what they are calling errors are not from what I can tell. Some referred to the "wid" tag. The GC web site understands what that is, but W3C does not. W3C says the "=" after the "wid" tag should be an ampersand.

 

Yes, I did look at the errors, and yes, the ones you claim should not be errors are indeed errors.

 

For example, in the one you mentioned above: an HTML parser should interpret the "&wid=" as an entity. Any actual ampersands need to be escaped using &.

 

Most of the errors are of that type, or inconsistent use of quotes in attributes, lack of escapes, etc.

 

Now, most browsers will "forgive" those errors and render the page. But they are still errors.

 

One of my favorites is where it says that ID numbers cannot use a number to start a name. Sure it can! All of our ID's are numbers (mine is 3512 as you can see on the left if you mouse over my nickname) and the web site handles that information properly.

 

IDs of XHTML tags cannot begin with a number. The fact that the site uses "ID" as an attribute is just a database design error; the fact is that the code is not W3C compliant. That makes it an error.

 

How about this one 'cannot generate system identifier for general entity "J"' where it is referring to 'Thanks, T&J (Scoobywatchers)' Wow, we all now have to sign our logs on the site so they pass the almighty W3C test? Oh the humanity!!! I can go on an on.

 

The web server is supposed to escape entities like the ampersand sign. It doesn't. That's an error.

 

The fact that the pages render in the browsers says a lot about how forgiving they are. But your claim that they aren't really errors is just wrong. The pages are not compliant XHTML.

Share this post


Link to post

Groundspeak puts out a newsletter each week. They have EMail addresses for every user of the site. It would not have taken them more than a few minutes to put together an information release to give cache owners advance warning that their pages might have issues.

That is where the "fault" of Groundspeak lies.

From experience I know this is something you usually don't do. Try composing an email to convey the information above that would not instantly generate thousands of email replies. As soon as GS send an email telling users that they are doing an update that might effect a tiny percent of pages they will receive thousands of emails from people asking for information on the update wanting to know what they are doing and why they are making changes. Once again it comes down to manpower. With every notice they send out they will receive a ton of emails asking, "Will my caches be affected?" Then if a response is not send in six hours the opinion changes to "GS doesn't care about us" and "they should have warned us sooner".

The notification argument is a moot point. Even if they sent an email saying they were making an update the cache pages would still be broken and we would still be in the same place. The only difference is that GS would still be replying to emails asking about the update instead of fixing things like the white space issue.

Share this post


Link to post

On the subject of the W3C test. W3c validation is like having a mechanic disassemble your car and test each and every part. Just because your O2 sensor is reading 8 volts instead of 7.5 volts that doesn't translate into your car not working. I have seen many pages that pass the validation still not work. Also, what pages that have dynamic content pass the validation? Hell if you run the validation on w3.org you get 30 errors and 420 warnings and they develop the W3C standards.

Edited by andy2049

Share this post


Link to post

Hell if you run the validation on w3.org you get 30 errors and 420 warnings and they develop the W3C standards.

 

Really?w3.org test

Edited by Arse&Hemi

Share this post


Link to post

We are the shareholders of the information on this site. We are fools.

Making a play on words does not cut it. You do not own a piece of the company which means you do not have a financially vested interest.

 

We all own the caches used to play the game, and it costs plenty to set them up.

Without the caches there is no geocaching. Regardless of who owns the building.

Edited by Arse&Hemi

Share this post


Link to post
I won't comment on the results for geocaching.com

 

Interesting...

 

I took a random cache page URL: Cache Page and ran it through the W3C Markup Validation service.

 

The result?

 

163 Errors, 53 warning(s)

 

Yikes.

 

Try it yourself.

 

ETA: None of the errors was in the user-generated portion of the page. They are all in the Groundspeak code. And yes, they are really errors.

So what?

 

I assume that TPTB do not run their own code through HTML Tidy. They do, however, run code that is submitted from outside the company through it. Do you really have a problem with their trusting their own code but not trusting the code that is submitted from outside the company? I would truly be shocked if you did.

 

Edited to add that I suspect that you are forgetting why HTML Tidy was implemented on GC.com.

 

Ohkayyyyyy, so TPTB should take the time to notify everyone and give them time to prepare BEFORE they fix a security issue?? How long would you suggest that they give as notice, a wekk, amonth, hey better yet, 6 months, that way they can tell us the site isn't secure every week, but still make sure that everyone has the time to clean up their bad coding.......

 

You should come to NY and run for public office..........................

Yeah, way to misrepresent things.

 

Responses like this deserve about this much response....

TPTB clearly stated that they changed to the new version of HTML Tidy due to a security issue caused by the older version. Do you really think that it would be wise for them to announce that there was a security hole that they intentionally were going to leave open for some amount of time? Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post
We are the shareholders of the information on this site. We are fools.
Making a play on words does not cut it. You do not own a piece of the company which means you do not have a financially vested interest.
We all own the caches used to play the game, and it costs plenty to set them up.

Without the caches there is no geocaching. Regardless of who owns the building.

That ownership interest gives you the right to take your toys and go home. It doesn't give you the right to dictate policy.

Share this post


Link to post

Sites like eBay allow users to add their own content, and we have had no display problems listing our pages with them.

 

If it's a security issue maybe gc should take a look at how other companies like eBay handle the problem. Instead of limiting the allowed content of it's users.

Share this post


Link to post

Sites like eBay allow users to add their own content, and we have had no display problems listing our pages with them.

 

If it's a security issue maybe gc should take a look at how other companies like eBay handle the problem. Instead of limiting the allowed content of it's users.

Ummm... eBay is a few thousand times larger than Groundspeak, and has a few million dollars more that they can use to handle this sort of thing. That comparison is simply not a fair one by any stretch.

 

--Larry

Share this post


Link to post

Sites like eBay allow users to add their own content, and we have had no display problems listing our pages with them.

 

If it's a security issue maybe gc should take a look at how other companies like eBay handle the problem. Instead of limiting the allowed content of it's users.

Ummm... eBay is a few thousand times larger than Groundspeak, and has a few million dollars more that they can use to handle this sort of thing. That comparison is simply not a fair one by any stretch.

 

--Larry

 

eBay hasn't always been as big as it is now. They have been able to allow user content and handle security too. Maybe gc should cough up a little extra and hire a consultant from that team.

Share this post


Link to post

eBay hasn't always been as big as it is now. They have been able to allow user content and handle security too. Maybe gc should cough up a little extra and hire a consultant from that team.

eBay had tons of security problems when they were small. Plenty of money eventually bought plenty of security.

 

Besides, it might well have been a consultant that recommended Groundspeak use HTML Tidy as a security measure....

 

--Larry

Share this post


Link to post

eBay has 229 errors on their home page. :lol:

 

The fact that the pages render in the browsers says a lot about how forgiving they are. But your claim that they aren't really errors is just wrong. The pages are not compliant XHTML.

So the answer is to bloat the web site more with code that ends up rendering OK anyway?

 

What about the errors I posted above from my web site? What about the errors on your web site?

 

Google has 47 Errors, 2 warnings. CNN has 66 Errors, 48 warnings. Yahoo.com has 133 Errors, 28 warnings. Fox News has 227 Errors, 28 warnings. GoDaddy has 618 Errors, 96 warnings.

 

How does the internet survive and not implode on itself?

 

W3C validation is a red herring.

 

I would like to see the OP post his entire code that he says works flawlessly here frankly. The button with the "#" symbol on it will let you do that.

Share this post


Link to post

eBay hasn't always been as big as it is now. They have been able to allow user content and handle security too. Maybe gc should cough up a little extra and hire a consultant from that team.

eBay had tons of security problems when they were small. Plenty of money eventually bought plenty of security.

 

Besides, it might well have been a consultant that recommended Groundspeak use HTML Tidy as a security measure....

 

--Larry

As I understand it, HTML Tidy wasn't initially implemented as a security measure. It was implemented in 2005 to strip irritating junk out of cache descriptions and to resolve issues with bad html not displaying correctly when viewed with different browsers.

 

Unfortunately, the version of HTML Tidy that the site most recently used created a security issue. This necessitated the upgrade to the newer version of HTML Tidy, which broke the OP's pages.

Share this post


Link to post

But bullying us around seems like a dumb move. I have been a member since 2001, never paid but technology has changed and I actually started use geocache more because of it. So I have been considering a premium membership but this is not helping their case.

 

So, let me make sure I've got this straight. You have been using the site and the interface and the data for 9 years now, which enabled you to enjoy geocaching all that time without paying anyone a single penny, and you think you have the right to demand that they specifically consider your needs and wants before doing anything with their business? Interesting thought process.

 

Hey dude it isn't just my needs we are talking about here. It's what the users want... I am not asking to do things just for me but for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post

But bullying us around seems like a dumb move. I have been a member since 2001, never paid but technology has changed and I actually started use geocache more because of it. So I have been considering a premium membership but this is not helping their case.

 

So, let me make sure I've got this straight. You have been using the site and the interface and the data for 9 years now, which enabled you to enjoy geocaching all that time without paying anyone a single penny, and you think you have the right to demand that they specifically consider your needs and wants before doing anything with their business? Interesting thought process.

 

Hey dude it isn't just my needs we are talking about here. It's what the users want... I am not asking to do things just for me but for everyone.

Having just gone back and reread your previous post, is it possible that you think that this 'protest' is somehow related to Jeremy's refusal to offer a public API back in 2008? Honestly, that post and this most recent post doesn't appear to have much to do with this thread, at all.

Share this post


Link to post

I feel terrible that our changes made work for a lot of cache owners with custom pages, but the OP is only punishing himself and his fellow cachers with this "protest". Just *tell us* you're upset and we hear you. No need for the theatrics.

 

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

i'm gonna "protest" the changes by putting all my FINDS up for sale on eBay, anyone interested? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... :lol:

 

Then a much more dramatic protest is go steal his lunch out of the office refrigerator :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
My 33 cache hides are Temporary Disabled until I got an answer from Groundspeak or I see changes on the website

The answer was given well before you made this post.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=240315

 

Hush now!! I was going to wait and see how long they kept their caches disabled in the (most likely) case that they did NOT get "an answer from Groundspeak or see changes on the website". Now you have to go and spoil my fun by pointing out that there already has been an answer? Thanks! :lol:

Edited by knowschad

Share this post


Link to post

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... :lol:

 

Then a much more dramatic protest is go steal his lunch out of the office refrigerator :lol:

or his red stapler.

Share this post


Link to post

eBay has 229 errors on their home page. :lol:

 

How does the internet survive and not implode on itself?

 

W3C validation is a red herring.

 

You're right. I was too harsh and I regret that.

 

XHTML compliance is not the same as HTML compliance; it's a lot tougher and probably not really required.

 

I have been doing some Greasemonkey scripts for myself so I was looking pretty closely at the cache page HTML, and I was not particularly liking what I saw, but I definitely over-reacted.

Share this post


Link to post

It did make me want to go back and add alt tags on all of my navigation buttons though. That's what my valid errors were. When I built my site I figured they didn't need the alt tag, but they really do.

Share this post


Link to post

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... :lol:

 

Then a much more dramatic protest is go steal his lunch out of the office refrigerator :lol:

or his red stapler.

 

What, you want him to burn down Groundspeak? That might have a deleterious effect on the chance of finding caches in the future...

Share this post


Link to post

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

I work in a cubicle... :lol:

Then a much more dramatic protest is go steal his lunch out of the office refrigerator :lol:

or his red stapler.

What, you want him to burn down Groundspeak? That might have a deleterious effect on the chance of finding caches in the future...

It would fix the current IE6 problems though. Once and for all.

Share this post


Link to post

or his red stapler.

What, you want him to burn down Groundspeak? That might have a deleterious effect on the chance of finding caches in the future...

It would fix the current IE6 problems though. Once and for all.

 

Good point...

Edited by Sioneva

Share this post


Link to post
My 33 cache hides are Temporary Disabled until I got an answer from Groundspeak or I see changes on the website

 

The OP and the ARP are bad ideas. It appears as a temper tantrum.

Share this post


Link to post

OK, looks like this thread has come to this point........

BeatDeadHorse.gif

Whipping an exhausted camel?

Share this post


Link to post

I feel terrible that our changes made work for a lot of cache owners with custom pages, but the OP is only punishing himself and his fellow cachers with this "protest". Just *tell us* you're upset and we hear you. No need for the theatrics.

 

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... B)

 

Don't mess with me! I'll come over there and chain myself to your coffee cup! Though I suppose that would mean that I would have to spring for the bagels. The heck with it. You're on your own.

Share this post


Link to post

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... B)

 

Then a much more dramatic protest is go steal his lunch out of the office refrigerator :)

No thanks. I already eat lunch.

Share this post


Link to post

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... B)

 

Then a much more dramatic protest is go steal his lunch out of the office refrigerator :)

or his red stapler.

 

It wont mach my shoes.

Share this post


Link to post

eBay has 229 errors on their home page. B)

 

W3C validation is a red herring.

Are you checking CSS or HTML? If you check both, most sites will have errors.

 

The problem with the validators is that they're kind of irrelevant because most sites display fine, even if they have errors.

Edited by Skippermark

Share this post


Link to post

I feel terrible that our changes made work for a lot of cache owners with custom pages, but the OP is only punishing himself and his fellow cachers with this "protest". Just *tell us* you're upset and we hear you. No need for the theatrics.

 

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... B)

 

Chain yourself to his cubicle and bring donuts?

Share this post


Link to post

eBay has 229 errors on their home page. B)

 

W3C validation is a red herring.

Are you checking CSS or HTML? If you check both, most sites will have errors.

 

The problem with the validators is that they're kind of irrelevant because most sites display fine, even if they have errors.

Correct. That is exactly the point that was trying to be made. Someone mentioned that GC was using bad code because of the w3c validation.

Share this post


Link to post

I feel terrible that our changes made work for a lot of cache owners with custom pages, but the OP is only punishing himself and his fellow cachers with this "protest". Just *tell us* you're upset and we hear you. No need for the theatrics.

 

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... B)

 

Chain yourself to his cubicle and bring donuts?

 

And not offer to share?

Share this post


Link to post

I feel terrible that our changes made work for a lot of cache owners with custom pages, but the OP is only punishing himself and his fellow cachers with this "protest". Just *tell us* you're upset and we hear you. No need for the theatrics.

 

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... B)

 

Chain yourself to his cubicle and bring donuts?

 

And not offer to share?

But who supplies the coffee?

Share this post


Link to post

I feel terrible that our changes made work for a lot of cache owners with custom pages, but the OP is only punishing himself and his fellow cachers with this "protest". Just *tell us* you're upset and we hear you. No need for the theatrics.

 

You want to protest? Chain yourself to Nate's office door.

 

I work in a cubicle... B)

 

Chain yourself to his cubicle and bring donuts?

 

And not offer to share?

But who supplies the coffee?

 

Jeremy! :)

Share this post


Link to post

Man if I had posted a rant everytime GC changed something since I started caching in 2001 I would have a lot more posts than I have now!

 

Growth is not always painless. Suck it up...

Edited by sledgehampster

Share this post


Link to post

We are the shareholders of the information on this site. We are fools.

Making a play on words does not cut it. You do not own a piece of the company which means you do not have a financially vested interest.

 

We all own the caches used to play the game, and it costs plenty to set them up.

Without the caches there is no geocaching. Regardless of who owns the building.

Yah I've seen this argument too many times and yet, geocaching still remains. Go figure.

Share this post


Link to post

mtn-man

You said that you were one of the tester, I have one question did anyone test with IE6? yes or no I can not get an answer from anyone on this question.

 

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
mtn-man

You said that you were one of the tester, I have one question did anyone test with IE6? yes or no I can not get an answer from anyone on this question.

Tom

At this point, what does it matter?

Share this post


Link to post

OK you tell me to move on. I have all ready went to IE8 but it does not work some of the time.

When page does not display I clicked on error and got this.

 

IWebpage error details

 

User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729)

Timestamp: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 01:12:18 UTC

 

Message: HTML Parsing Error: Unable to modify the parent container element before the child element is closed (KB927917)

Line: 0

Char: 0

Code: 0

URI: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.asp...676&dist=25

 

Who's problem is this GS or mine???

Now I guess I need to go BUY a new computer.

Edited by Camper Guy

Share this post


Link to post
OK you tell me to move on. I have all ready went to IE8 but it does not work some of the time.

When page does not display I clicked on error and got this.

Does it only affect some pages? Can you provide the URL?

Share this post


Link to post

Does it only affect some pages? No

Can you provide the URL? http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.asp...676&dist=25

 

I can go back and click on the page again and it will load most of the time. It can be any page.

I could reproduce it with IE8 and Vista as well, by loading that page, then keep clicking on Reload at the rate of about once a second. You may want to post this on the other threads that GS actually tracks - not sure if they pay much attention to this one. If I click on it fast enough, IE8 would freeze altogether and not load the page subsequently.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

×
×
  • Create New...