why do I get different validated output in w3c validator?

Here is my link
http : // 173 dot 45 dot 229 dot 122 / phpBB3 / (without spaces)

I give this url and check for validation I get sum 41 errors. - This is one way
I do View Source and check for validation I get 103 errors - This is another way

Why do I get different results like this? Am using a PHPBB3 thats a CMS kind application where 80% would be driven by default phpbb3 itself 20% is my work....

what to do for this kind of site???? am depressed:mad::mad:

Any solutions?

I give this url and check for validation I get sum 41 errors. - This is one way
I do View Source and check for validation I get 103 errors - This is another wayYou're probably using two different validators. They'll vary in quality and some will catch errors that technically aren't validation (via a DTD) errors, but still errors according to the spec nevertheless. Plus, be sure not to confuse warnings with errors.

what to do for this kind of site???? am depressed:mad::mad:You either need to write your own bulletin board from the ground up, find one that does validate, or live with the errors. Unfortunately, you'll find that a lot of prepackaged software is written using broken code. Forum software, in particular, all seems to use tables for layout.

The following forums should validate and have no tables ::

Simple Machines Forum
http://www.simplemachines.org/

Vanilla
http://vanillaforums.org/

PunBB
http://punbb.informer.com/

Unfortunately, you'll find that a lot of prepackaged software is written using broken code. Forum software, in particular, all seems to use tables for layout.

The use of tables doesn't infer broken/invalid code however.

Simple Machines Forum
http://www.simplemachines.org/

Vanilla
http://vanillaforums.org/

PunBB
http://punbb.informer.com/Interesting. I went to all of these sites. The "Community" tab of the first leads to an invalid, table-based forum. The "Community" tab of the second leads to a tableless forum, but the code is still invalid. The last one is the only one that I could get to pass validation and was also tableless.

The use of tables doesn't infer broken/invalid code however.Right that it doesn't necessarily infer invalid code; I probably should have mentioned that. I don't think I've ever seen one that was either valid or semantically accurate though.