Read error

Grok Headline matches for Read error

HotFix Watch: Win32 Error = 1072 error
appears after you change the SMS 2.0
Service account of a secondary site

HotFix Watch: Win32 Error = 1072 error
appears after you change the SMS 2.0
Service account of a secondary site 12/28/2004 07:03 PM

22 Italians (funny, it only read 12 when
I first read it this morning) died in a
bomb blast in Iraq

22 Italians (funny, it only read 12 when
I first read it this morning) died in a
bomb blast in Iraq 11/13/2003 08:53 AM
Bombing comes despite attacks on insurgents .. lourd tribut .. CNN

cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/11/12/sprj.irq.main/index.html
track this site | 6 links

Cliex32.dll Error 126 Error in
Wnmanual.log

Cliex32.dll Error 126 Error in
Wnmanual.log 06/18/2004 08:16 AM

Advanced Error Handling: Writing an
Error Handling Class

Advanced Error Handling: Writing an
Error Handling Class 11/10/2003 11:25 PM
If you're tired of the default error handler and want to have complete control over default error messages, you should write your own error handling class. Writing your own handler will enable you to change the way php handles your error messages, and allows you to create your own error types. With this class you will be able to send error messages to a log file, or send error reports via email.

Read My Lips: Read My Lips Proudly
Presents the 89th Edition of the
Carnival of the Vanities

Read My Lips: Read My Lips Proudly
Presents the 89th Edition of the
Carnival of the Vanities 06/03/2004 06:36 AM
Read My Lips: Read My Lips Proudly Presents the 89th Edition of the Carnival of the Vanities

tig.mu.nu/archives/030809.html
track this site | 6 links

If you read nothing else today - READ
THIS

If you read nothing else today - READ
THIS 03/13/2003 12:46 PM
great piece (full of the truth) .. The French Connection .. New York Times .. him seriously .. Bill Safire

track this site | 8 links

"If you read nothing else today - READ
THIS"

"If you read nothing else today - READ
THIS" 03/13/2003 03:47 PM

404 error

404 error 01/14/2003 02:28 PM

I found this funny 404 error message on SDForum's Web site:

Either BOF or EOF is True, or the current record has been deleted. Requested operation requires a current record.

PXE-E51 Error

PXE-E51 Error 08/14/2004 05:23 PM

Error

Error 08/10/2004 02:34 PM

livejournal.com/tools/memadd.bml?journal=jmhm&itemid=959603
track this site | 2 links

Margins of Error

Margins of Error 07/20/2004 09:16 AM
Wider margins should be greeted with wider smiles.

Error in SMS RTM Documentation

Error in SMS RTM Documentation 05/28/2004 05:06 AM

Error-Wait-0.01

Error-Wait-0.01 11/03/2003 05:54 PM

On "Feedbag Error 17"...

On "Feedbag Error 17"... 10/29/2003 12:10 AM

A couple of days ago I noticed that I couldn't add Azeem Azhar to my iChat AV contacts list. I kept getting returned "Feedbag Error 17" which seemed entirely unexpected and unpleasantly phrased. Was I a feedbag? Had iChat eaten Azeem? The mind boggled.

After several hours of consideration, another option occurred to me. Perhaps iChat was trying to protect me from excessive contact with Azeem! Maybe my beautiful new Pantherised beast was being defensive! "No, Tom!" It was going, "He's bad news! He'll tell you that you work in Marketing again and you'll get all cross and defensive and make that ludicrous speech about being an artisan! Please! Please! Let me protect you from the embarrassment!" At which point, I assumed, feedbag laptop decided to chow-down on poor Mr Azhar's AIM name with fierce hungry vengeance. I touted this theory around a few of my friends. General consensus, "It's not a bug, it's a feature!"

Well now I know that I'm not alone and that it's nothing personal, Mr Azhar! My Powerbook loves you and iChat loves you and all I had to do was throw away a couple of my childhood friends who - frankly - are never online anyway and kind of sucked at web stuff. In the end the problem was all caused by having too many friends - apparently AIM can only handle 150 contacts - at least that is according to Mssrs. Unsanity, Rael and Webb.

But it occurs to me that there's something slightly suspicious about all of this. A couple of days ago I tried searching for information about this error message, but it was nowhere. There was literally no information. Today, there's a search result returned, and posts about the subject on three separate weblogs. So what's happened? Is it a new error message or is it just we've all hit the limit at the same time? Or has the number of buddies available changed? I smell a mystery!

Read the comments

Error-Wait-0.02

Error-Wait-0.02 11/16/2003 04:50 AM

Error-Wait-0.03

Error-Wait-0.03 11/16/2003 04:50 AM

SMS FAQ: Error Code 53

SMS FAQ: Error Code 53 06/24/2004 09:38 PM

Error In Downloading

Error In Downloading 11/14/2003 09:47 PM
Record, tech industries battle to make music pay off. By Russ Britt and Steve Gelsi (CBS MarketWatch via MyAppleMenu)

VBScript Error with FTM

VBScript Error with FTM 09/02/2004 02:43 AM

404 ERROR - Ultrashock.com

404 ERROR - Ultrashock.com 12/14/2003 06:49 AM
usable 404 page

ultrashock.com/404
track this site | 4 links

A possible fix for an iTunes 4.8 error
400

A possible fix for an iTunes 4.8 error
400 06/22/2005 02:23 AM
If you recently upgraded iTunes, you may have problems authenticating, viewing your cart, or shopping. There are two errors which have been occuring recently. The first seems to be 502, I believe, and this appears to be resol...

Error Handler

Error Handler 04/16/2005 11:27 PM
Support now available

More on XML Error Handling

More on XML Error Handling 01/22/2004 02:56 AM

I thought I'd respond to a few of the comments I received:

Many people suggested that there be a built-in validator in the browser that could show the errors to the developer. The validators basically break down into two types: obtrusive validators and unobtrusive validators.

If the validator is unobtrusive, then I would argue that it won't receive sufficient usage to make a difference. If the browser doesn't impose a penalty of some kind, then there will be no incentive for the author to correct mistakes.

I can see the value of an obtrusive validator, as long as the obtrusive part was only checking well-formedness (i.e., really basic mistakes).

(2) Some people pointed out that my own blog was not valid. I have two responses to that:

(a) I am not arguing for perfectly valid XML documents. I am arguing for well-formed XML documents. There is a difference. I think asking that the page be well-formed is setting the bar fairly low. For example, one of the current errors on this blog is that I have two elements with the same id. While this makes the blog invalid, it does not have any effect on the blog being well-formed. At least I don't think it does. :)

(b) I'm illustrating a point, namely that I have no reason to make the blog valid, given that browsers will display the blog anyway.

(3) People complained that I wasn't serving up XHTML. I can't actually serve up XHTML if I want the blog to be displayable in all browsers, including Safari, which still has sufficient issues with XHTML that I can't make that switch yet.

(4) My comments on HTML error handling were largely misinterpreted.

Some people thought I was attacking WinIE for its permissive handling of HTML. I was not, and I'm glad others appreciated that fact. Back in the 90s WinIE had to emulate the permissive error handling of the then-dominant browser Netscape. They had no choice if they wanted Web sites to be viewable as the designer intended. They were in the same position then that Safari is in now.

Nor am I suggesting that WinIE should become less tolerant of malformed HTML, or that they are at fault for not doing so. That is simply not a logical conclusion to have drawn from my previous comments. You can't take a Web site (even a malformed one) that works a certain way and suddenly refuse to render it or even render it radically differently than before.

For HTML, this issue was resolved long ago in favor of permissive error handling and recovery, and no modern browser is to blame for that situation.

Others said a browser that handles malformed HTML is better than one that does not, and if Safari doesn't handle all this malformed HTML, then it's simply not as capable a browser.

What amused me about this comment is that there is no definition of what it means to handle malformed HTML. As long as a browser shows you something and doesn't crash, it has handled the malformed HTML. What people don't understand is that you don't simply have to handle the malformed HTML. You have to handle it in exactly the same way as the Web browser that the site author designed for.

If you do not, you'll end up with different renderings of the same page, which as I said before, constitute the largest set of rendering differences between Web browsers. Perfect emulation is what makes error recovery so difficult. If you allow grossly malformed pages, then most XML on the Web will end up being grossly malformed (as is the case with HTML today).

Once you have a Web full of grossly malformed XML, there will be one dominant browser that designers will check to see if the site looks ok. They will then make assumptions that other browsers will recover from the malformation errors in precisely the same way and will simply assume that it is the fault of the other browsers if they don't.

Right now it is the responsibility of alternate browsers to emulate the dominant browser's error recovery strategies, but there's simply no reason to do that for XML as well.

Blue Or Red? Error Or Not?

Blue Or Red? Error Or Not? 04/05/2005 04:18 AM
More variation mongers, but this time it's legit - though a little bass ackwards, or is it?

XML Error Reporting II

XML Error Reporting II 01/22/2004 03:30 PM

Responding to comments in the previous blog entry:

(1) Some people thought this was a hacked expat. Darin actually switched Safari over to libxml2, so the error messages you're seeing (as well as the ability to continue parsing) are all built in to libxml2.

(2) Do you think it's better to show the page only up to the first error or to try to display the entire page (with the understanding that what follows the first error could be very badly mangled)?

(3) Often there are a lot of meaningless errors after the first. I could put a cap on the number of displayed errors to deal with this problem or just not worry about it. What do people think?

(4) Those of you who suggested drawers for errors, remember a drawer is a UI element in Safari and not WebKit. This feature should just work out of the box for WebKit clients, so I'm inclined not to use drawers or sheets, but to just display the errors at the top of the page.

XML Error Reporting III

XML Error Reporting III 01/24/2004 02:50 PM

Thanks to those of you who answered my question regarding how much of an invalid page should be rendered. It turns out that the XML spec is clear on this issue, and that I must stop building up the page DOM after the first fatal error is encountered.

With that in mind I now tell libxml to continue the processing, but I start ignoring all of the callbacks. That way I get a list of all the errors, but properly stop the DOM tree buildup after the first error.

For those of you who suggested that WebKit needs some sort of error reporting API, I agree, and if it had one, these errors would obviously be reported to it. However, these errors still have to be reported aggressively so that WebKit clients can't mask these mistakes.

I don't believe in showing a sheet or a dialog as an intermediate step prior to displaying a rendering of the page. The reason I dislike this idea is that this error reporting is primarily a Web developer feature, and they're just going to want to load the page, see the errors, maybe correct some CSS at the same time, and then reload with changes until the error report has been eliminated.

The end user isn't ever going to see this report, since anyone who makes an invalid XML file right now ends up with something that won't display in any browser. Thus it seems to me that the report should be easy to access (in terms of # of clicks), always visible, and included with the page rendering.

I have polished the look of the report a bit based off suggestions. Here's another screenshot.

Spot the Error

Spot the Error 02/10/2004 02:45 AM
Cleaned up eh? (hint: line 28)...

Error-Wait-0.05

Error-Wait-0.05 12/27/2003 06:42 PM

Database Error

Database Error 05/07/2004 06:10 AM

Access Error

Access Error 05/24/2004 04:33 AM
General Says Sanchez Rejected Her Offer to Give Address to Iraqis About Abuses

c.moreover.com/click/here.pl?r157808591
track this site | 3 links

Error in fink-0.22.0

Error in fink-0.22.0 08/21/2004 12:30 PM
The fink-0.22.0 package manager, which was available briefly in the unstable tree this past week, had a bug which prevents further updating via rsync. If you installed this version of fink, you can recover by running the command fink install fink-0.21.2-1 which will downgrade fink to the version in the stable tree, and subsequently running fink selfupdate If for any reason those commands don't work, go to the fink file release page at sourceforge and download the file fink-0.22.1.tar.gz . Unpack this file with tar xfz fink-0.22.1.tar.gz , and then from within the fink-0.22.1 directory, run the command ./inject.pl The fink team apologizes for the error, and thanks the user community for bringing it to our attention quickly.

XP SP2 Error: The page cannot be
displayed

XP SP2 Error: The page cannot be
displayed 08/10/2004 12:00 AM
Tech-Recipes Aug 10 2004 3:13AM GMT

Error 2509: SMS_COLLECTION_EVALUATOR

Error 2509: SMS_COLLECTION_EVALUATOR 05/28/2004 03:21 AM

XML Error Handling in Web Browsers

XML Error Handling in Web Browsers 01/19/2004 12:39 AM

I've been following the topic of XML error handling on Mark Pilgrim's blog with great interest. Go read this blog entry. Done? Good. Now go read this blog entry.

Safari has draconian XML error handling. If the file isn't well-formed, Safari won't display it. Mozilla does the same, which should come as no surprise, since the two browsers use the same open-source XML parser (expat).

I fall squarely into the draconian camp and agree with Tim Bray. Fully half of the bugs I receive in WebCore are not bugs at all, but are essentially differences in error handling and error recovery between Safari and the dominant Web browser, WinIE. None of these issues occur with XML.

If we lived in a world where browsers could refuse to display malformed content (with useful error notification of course so that authors could easily repair their content), then all of these "bugs" would simply disappear. I could focus my efforts on real DOM and CSS bugs, and not have to waste my time emulating the behavior of WinIE.

Relaxing restrictions on well-formedness is a slippery slope, and where does it end? Consider all the "helpful" rules that exist in HTML today thanks to early versions of Netscape and WinIE. Did you know that any h1-h6 tag can close any other h1-h6 tag? Try it. Open an h1, type some text and then put in a close h2. It will close up the h1 in WinIE and Mozilla. (I haven't yet fixed this "bug" in Safari.) Try specifying a close tag for a paragraph by itself. You'll get an empty paragraph in Safari, Mozilla, and WinIE.

Of course the most complicated error recovery problem is residual style, which I have blogged about at length. This "helpful feature" (note the sarcasm) allows you to accidentally mis-nest style tags like the italic and bold tags and basically treat HTML more like a stream of "on/off" states than an actual tree structure. This feature is more a by-product of primitive browsers from the 90s that didn't have true DOMs than an actual intended error recovery system.

There's also the missing quotes problem, e.g., leaving a close quote off a link href. Browsers employ complicated heuristics to try to match up unclosed quotes that depend on the number of quotes in the document, their positions, and other factors. Safari doesn't really handle this problem that well yet, and it shouldn't have to.

The whole reason nearly all Web pages on the Internet are malformed is because browsers let Web page authors get away with it. As long as browsers are permissive in their error handling and recovery, Web authors will continue to produce invalid Web pages, because they won't even have any idea the pages they are authoring are invalid!

People in the error recovery camp then suggest ideas like icons in the status bar, or error messages dumped to some obscure console, but the average Web designer isn't going to know or care about validation as long as WinIE displays the Web site adequately. The only way you can make the average Web designer care is to get in his face with the obvious errors. The browser has to make a face and refuse to eat the swill that is being force-fed to it, or the average designer is simply going to shrug and say, "Well, close enough."

The crux of the problem with implementing true error recovery is that it must be unambiguous. Every Web browser has to recover from malformed content in precisely the same way. This means that in order for browsers to be tolerant of malformed content, there would have to be a specification regarding how to handle all possible malformations. This is virtually impossible to specify, so why waste time and energy on it when creating well-formed XML files is so ridiculously simple?

I think people who don't work on Web browsers for a living have no concept of just how malformed the Web really is, so let me state this as clearly as I can:

The #1 reason that HTML pages render incorrectly in alternate browsers is because of differences in error handling and recovery.

History of XML Error Handling

History of XML Error Handling 01/18/2004 12:24 AM
I encourage everyone to go and read Mark Pilgrim’s remark able overview of the history of XML error-handling. His summary is In the end, Tim basically said “there are two camps here, they both have good points, we aren’t going to convince each other on this one” and then proceeded to compromise by doing it his way. Mark’s selection of out-takes from the debate would seem to support that narrative. Excuse me while I go off in a corner and shake off the megalomania. Let’s get real: even my Mom wouldn’t believe that I could single-handedly impose so fundamental a policy decision on this large and passionate a community by saying “Make it so.” What happened was, we had a really big, really long, really passionate argument on the subject; the camps came to be called “Draconians” and “Tolerants.” After this had gone on for some weeks and some hundreds of emails, we took a vote and the Draconians won 7-4. And indeed, some among the Tolerants cried foul over that vote. This was a good example of what we mean when we say “rough consensus” in that even those on the short side of the vote were willing to defend the process and the outcome; see Hollander and Sperberg-McQueen. Other interesting glimpses into this history may be found here and, giving the last word, as is appropriate, to Jon Bosak, here.

Client Error Code 400

Client Error Code 400 06/06/2004 05:34 PM

Obtrusive XML Error Reporting

Obtrusive XML Error Reporting 01/22/2004 04:10 AM

I spent some time tinkering with XML today and decided to try out a non-draconian approach to XML error recovery. Point the browser of your choice at the following XHTML URL:

http://www.faireal.net/soft/browser/XHTML-In validator?Content-Type=application/xhtml+xml

If you try this in Mozilla, you should get something like this:

Screenshot

In current versions of Safari, you get something even worse, since you don't even get any line/col information.

What I implemented in my build (it's still just at the tinkering stage remember, so be gentle) is error recovery for non-fatal errors, i.e., the XML parser continues and attempts to recover from the error, and then I still build the DOM for the XML.

Once the parser is finished, I then display the Web page, but with a badge of shame, namely an error report at the top that lists all of the discovered errors. This is not a halt-at-first-error system, which is cool, since it means you'll see *all* the errors in your page and not just one.

Here's a screenshot of what I have so far. The error report is just XHTML as well (shoehorned in at the top using DOM calls), so if you have any ideas of how I could style it to make it look really cool, show me your screenshots.

Let me know what you think of this idea. Do you like it better than draconian error handling? If you dislike it, let me know why!

Another ARC Trooper Error Found

Another ARC Trooper Error Found 12/18/2003 10:37 AM
Rebelscum reader Damon Hopkins send in a few photos of another variation of the ARC Trooper figure sfrom the Clone Wars. We've already seen various paint errors and a change in the shoulder ring, but when the stripes turned red, I suppose this error was inevitable...the skirt of the blue-striped figure have been added to the red-striped figure. Oops.

Computer error gives Calgary win

Computer error gives Calgary win 06/09/2004 07:42 AM
National Post Jun 9 2004 12:24PM GMT
Grok Description matches for Read error
GrokA matches for Read error

Read error

The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry: