validator.w3.org Validation Errors

I used the validator.w3.org website to check the coding in a way to try speed up site loading. I was able to fix quite a few of them but I dont know where to look to find these ones it raised or if in fact they are all actual errors.

I've attached scrrenshots of the results,

Those are small HTML5 vs HTML4 differences.
If you're using ZC v154 as you specified when you posted, then it seems you're also using a template that's embracing HTML5 syntax.
A significant number of changes were made to the defaults in v155 with regard to HTML5. Whether your template uses them effectively is up to the template author.

it's just the standard out of the box template that came with zencart.

Haggis:

I used the validator.w3.org website to check the coding in a way to try speed up site loading. I was able to fix quite a few of them but I dont know where to look to find these ones it raised or if in fact they are all actual errors.

I get zillions of errors that I'm sure are false. Most common - things like "expected < is missing" or "expected <div> is missing. Then when I track them down they are clearly not missing.

I've wondered it the test is reading extra blank spaces or some such and/or if that is related to Dr Byte comment re html4 v 5. I'm using Responsive Sheffileld Blue 2.0 adapted to zc 1.5.5a so could well be age of code thing.

Haggis:

I was able to fix quite a few of them but I dont know where to look to find these ones it raised or if in fact they are all actual errors.
Some would say they're errors. But the ones you posted aren't going to be causing harm. They're slight syntax differences between HTML versions, but as far as I've experienced the browsers handle them correctly.

You said this is a fresh install. But why are you using old v1.5.4 for a new install, when newer versions exist?

soxophoneplayer:

I get zillions of errors that I'm sure are false. Most common - things like "expected < is missing" or "expected <div> is missing. Then when I track them down they are clearly not missing.

I've wondered it the test is reading extra blank spaces or some such and/or if that is related to Dr Byte comment re html4 v 5. I'm using Responsive Sheffileld Blue 2.0 adapted to zc 1.5.5a so could well be age of code thing.

i use the validator at:

https://validator.w3.org

and i have NEVER found it to be false.

it's true that a browser may render the page as you intended despite the errors. but, in my experience, the validator is always correct.

in addition, when someone has a layout issue/question with regards to a page, the first place i always turn is the validator. i find it very difficult to get the page laid out as i want it if the page has validation errors.

soxophoneplayer:

I get zillions of errors that I'm sure are false. Most common - things like "expected < is missing" or "expected <div> is missing. Then when I track them down they are clearly not missing.W3c has never been wrong in my experiences. Warnings are one thing but, errors can make huge differences in presentation depending on the browser. Unless you can force all you customers to use a modern browser, there will be mistakes.
Your comodo JavaScript is the first problem. Instead of```

dbltoe:

W3c has never been wrong in my experiences. Warnings are one thing but, errors can make huge differences in presentation depending on the browser. Unless you can force all you customers to use a modern browser, there will be mistakes.
Your comodo JavaScript is the first problem. Instead of```

DrByte:

You said this is a fresh install. But why are you using old v1.5.4 for a new install, when newer versions exist?

v1,5,4 was the latest when I installed, the 1.5.5 came out a few days later.

The reason Istill use it, is simply because I don't know enough yet to create a "template" of my existing pages that when updated don't remove all the small edits I've made, for example the Congratulations message.

soxophoneplayer:

Thanks for looking. In my case its usually that knowing a wee little bit is worse than knowing nothing. I also see now that I've improperly used <h3> go get a bigger font within my product descriptions. Oy.
You have to be careful about doing that. The SEs will count off if you try to put emphasis versus content. You might be able to use h2 versus h3 but make sure that there are not already some h2s being used.