Page look on Firefox 1.5 / IE 6/7 - CSS problem

Anon · Mar 5, 2006

HI everybody!

I'm working on a church website project at the moment.
I'm using Dreamweaver 8 for coding. The page is based on PHP.
For positing and characterizing elements we use CSS.

First of all have a look at the page:

http://minipage.nagelmann.info/index.php

On Firefox 1.5 everything looks pretty fine, but Internet Explorer
6 and the BETA 7 presents the page in total different way, perhaps
because of interpreting CSS in a wrong way.

Does anyone of you know how to fix this problem?
Desiging the page is a real pleasure, but problems like this
make me really abandon hope.

Thanks for your help and any suggestion to solve this problem...

Alex

Jonathan N. Little · Mar 5, 2006

> HI everybody!

I'm working on a church website project at the moment.
I'm using Dreamweaver 8 for coding. The page is based on PHP.
For positing and characterizing elements we use CSS.

First of all have a look at the page:

http://minipage.nagelmann.info/index.php

On Firefox 1.5 everything looks pretty fine, but Internet Explorer
6 and the BETA 7 presents the page in total different way, perhaps
because of interpreting CSS in a wrong way.

Does anyone of you know how to fix this problem?
Desiging the page is a real pleasure, but problems like this
make me really abandon hope.

Thanks for your help and any suggestion to solve this problem...

Alex

Alex, Alex ... Alex [mumble and grumble]

A very quick look at your source reveals a 'cut and paste' monstrosity!
BODY elements *within* the HEAD, Multiple BODY and HTML tags and more...
Maybe you should forego the WYSIWYG editors, all I find is that can
allow the novice to make a real mess really really fast!

Here a basic template to work from:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<meta name="description" content="YOUR_PAGE_DESCTIPTION">
<meta name="keywords" content="YOUR_KEYWORDS">

<title>template</title>

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="YOUR_STYLESHEET.css">

</head>
<body>



</body>
</html>

=?ISO-8859-15?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?= · Mar 5, 2006

> HI everybody!

I'm working on a church website project at the moment.
I'm using Dreamweaver 8 for coding.

Why pay $400US when you can use a free, open-source, web-standards
compliant, community-driven, extensible HTML editor software like Nvu?

To download: http://www.nvu.com/

To use the User Guide: http://nvudev.com/guide/1.0PR/ugs01.htm

The page is based on PHP.

For positing and characterizing elements we use CSS.

You use table to layout elements more than you use CSS, I'd say.

First of all have a look at the page:

http://minipage.nagelmann.info/index.php

On Firefox 1.5 everything looks pretty fine,

Recommendation: install HTML Validator (based on Tidy) as an extension
for Firefox 1.5:

HTML Validator (based on Tidy)
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/index.html

It will report errors and will warn you about bad coding practices.
It will *not* replace the necessary checking with the W3C HTML
validator. You still and definitely need to check your markup code with
the W3C HTML validator.

but Internet Explorer

6 and the BETA 7 presents the page in total different way, perhaps
because of interpreting CSS in a wrong way.

2nd recommendation: always use the W3C HTML validator and W3C CSS
validator to spot+correct errors. There are lots of errors in your page.
Johnathan N. Little is absolutely 100% right. Use a strict DTD, HTML
4.01. Don't use a transitional DTD and don't use XHTML unless you *know*
why you do this and unless you really need to do this.

3rd recommendation:
Also, avoid creating page layout based on table design. Even your
DreamWeaver friends would tell you the same:

"tables do a pretty lousy job of page construction. Among their
shortcomings is the implied bias of the code towards presentation rather
than structure, the necessity to nest tables in order to achieve the
most basic of layouts, and enough redundant bandwidth-hogging tags to
feed a large family of tag eating monsters for literally a month."
Tableless layout with DreamWeaver
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx/dreamweaver/articles/tableless_layout.html

4th recommendation:
Avoid using pt unit or px unit when defining font-size

"Do not specify the font-size in pt, or other absolute length units.
They render inconsistently across platforms and can't be resized by the
User Agent (e.g browser).
Use relative length units such as percent (...)"
W3C Quality Assurance tip for webmasters:
Care with Font Size: Recommended practices
http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/font-size#goodpractice

More help can be found at the links in this page:

http://www.gtalbot.org/NvuSection/NvuWebDesignTips/

Gérard

Alan J. Flavell · Mar 5, 2006

Recommendation: install HTML Validator (based on Tidy)

What *is* this nonsense? HTML Tidy is and never was a validator; how
could a genuine HTML validator possibly be based on such a thing?
[...]

HTML Validator (based on Tidy)
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/index.html

You've posted that repeatedly before, in spite of it being pointed out
by others how wrong it is. It does not become true by continually
repeating it.

In an SGML/XML context, the term "validator" has a definite
specialised meaning.

It will report errors and will warn you about bad coding practices.
It will *not* replace the necessary checking with the W3C HTML
validator.

In an SGML/XML context, all validators (properly so called) are
functionally equivalent: they differ only in details of user
interface, the helpfulness of their reporting messages etc., and in
any *optional* *additional* checks (additional to the operation of
validation, that is) which they may offer.

So if you are claiming that, of two validators, one is "necessary" and
the other is so different that it cannot replace it, then you seem to
have proved that they cannot both be validators.

Please use different wording to promote whatever it is you're trying
to promote. It would be even better if that Marc could be persuaded
not to misuse terminology in this way.

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?= · Mar 5, 2006

Alan J. Flavell wrote :

Recommendation: install HTML Validator (based on Tidy)

Click to expand...

What *is* this nonsense? HTML Tidy is and never was a validator; how
could a genuine HTML validator possibly be based on such a thing?
[...]

If you are referring to the actual/current name of Marc Gueury's
extension, then I agree: the name "Validator" is not correct and it
misleads.

You've posted that repeatedly before, in spite of it being pointed out
by others how wrong it is.

For now, it's a terminology/vocabulary issue; using M. Gueury's
extension is still useful for web authors and for the web in general
despite the wrong naming of the extension. And here, such incorrect
naming is most likely not intentional, not deliberate from Marc.

It does not become true by continually
repeating it.

In an SGML/XML context, the term "validator" has a definite
specialised meaning.

I know that. I'm not the author of the extension. I still maintain that
Marc Gueury's extension is useful, helpful and/but nevertheless does not
replace *validating* the pages with the W3C HTML validator.

In an SGML/XML context, all validators (properly so called) are
functionally equivalent: they differ only in details of user
interface, the helpfulness of their reporting messages etc., and in
any *optional* *additional* checks (additional to the operation of
validation, that is) which they may offer.

So if you are claiming that, of two validators, one is "necessary" and
the other is so different that it cannot replace it, then you seem to
have proved that they cannot both be validators.

Please use different wording to promote whatever it is you're trying
to promote.

Alan, if you visit this page:
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/index.html
then how are you going to name, to identify that Firefox extension then?

Alan, if tomorrow you open up a restaurant and if you name it "Krusty
Burgers", then I'll refer to it as "Krusty's restaurant" or "Krusty's
burgers restaurant", that is even if your restaurant serve 1st class
gastronomy. You'll chose the name of the restaurant, not me. And from
there, we'll all have to follow your "terminology".

It would be even better if that Marc could be persuaded
not to misuse terminology in this way.

Ah... yes, that would best and would solve all this terminology issue
for everyone.

Gérard

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?= · Mar 5, 2006

Alan J. Flavell wrote :

On Sun, 5 Mar 2006, Gérard Talbot wrote:

[snipped]

It would be even better if that Marc could be persuaded
not to misuse terminology in this way.

I just sent him a detailed email on this issue, explaining him that the
word "Validation" will (Murphy's law) mislead ordinary people into
thinking what his extension does not actually do.
I can forward it to you if you read French.

I think/hope Marc G. will make a decision or speak up in this newsgroup
or in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html
Subject: HTML Tidy vs. HTML Validator

From now on, I'll refer to his extension as HTML Tidy rather/instead.
There is nothing more/better I can do.

Cheers

Gérard

Alan J. Flavell · Mar 5, 2006

HTML Validator (based on Tidy)
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/index.html

Click to expand...

[...]
Please use different wording to promote whatever it is you're
trying to promote.

Click to expand...

Alan, if you visit this page:
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/index.html
then how are you going to name, to identify that Firefox extension then?

I would be sure to include the term "so-called", somewhere close to
where I was putting the term "Validator" in quotation marks.

In any case, the cited web page is about little else.

best

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?= · Mar 5, 2006

Alan J. Flavell wrote :

HTML Validator (based on Tidy)
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/index.html [...]
Please use different wording to promote whatever it is you're
trying to promote.

Click to expand...

Alan, if you visit this page:
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/index.html
then how are you going to name, to identify that Firefox extension then?

Click to expand...

I would be sure to include the term "so-called", somewhere close to
where I was putting the term "Validator" in quotation marks.

Adding quotation marks would still be misleading, would confuse, would
be cryptic, ... Anyway... I hope+believe he will be receptive to the
opinions expressed here and at
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html
His extension will be useful, helpful to lots of people regardless of
the final name of his extension: that matters.

In any case, the cited web page is about little else.

best

Well, he does say more at question 13
"13. The validation errors are not the same than the W3C validator"
of this page:
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/faq.html

Gérard

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?= · Mar 7, 2006

Alan J. Flavell wrote :

Recommendation: install HTML Validator (based on Tidy)

Click to expand...

What *is* this nonsense? HTML Tidy is and never was a validator; how
could a genuine HTML validator possibly be based on such a thing?
[...]

HTML Validator (based on Tidy)
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/index.html

Click to expand...

Version 0.8 and higher will be based on another algorithm as explained here:
"you will see the same validation but done with a different algorithm, a
SGML parser (OpenSP). It is the same algorithm program than the one
running on validator.w3.org. The validation is done based on the DTD
definition of HTML."
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/preview_080.html

Marc answered/replied in
Subject line: HTML Tidy vs. HTML Validator
newsgroup: comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html

I think now that this matter has been clarified enough and is closed as
far as I'm concerned.

Gérard

CSS positioning problem IE 6.0/7 // FF 1.5	2	Apr 14, 2006
Working on mobile css menu with plenty of frustration!	2	Dec 29, 2022
min-height in IE 6 and 7	3	Nov 28, 2008
IE 7 CSS Problems	12	Jun 21, 2007
CSS menu problems with IE 7	2	Jun 6, 2009
Advanced CSS help needed with dropdown problem in IE 6 & 7	3	Feb 1, 2008
a:hover span IE 6 & 7 issue	7	Apr 16, 2008
Fon-size Problem In Konqueror & Firefox 1.5	30	Jun 13, 2007

Page look on Firefox 1.5 / IE 6/7 - CSS problem

Anon

Jonathan N. Little

=?ISO-8859-15?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=

Alan J. Flavell

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=

Alan J. Flavell

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Latest Threads