An example Firefox deficiency

[Christopher Jahn]

....."Here is one, for the Hotel Colon in Barcelona."

In that case, maybe it needs irrigating rather than
validating?

Since you didn't quote anything I wrote, please feel free to
snip the attribution, too.

--
Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html

Freedom is just a hallucination created by a pathological
lack
of paranoia.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

And thanks re the tip on fixing the first error first.

<g> When you put it like that, it seems too simple to mention. It
came up for me when I didn't know how to fix the first one and tried to
move on to others; then it turned out that the others were fixed if
and only if the first one was.

 

[REM]

fitwell <[email protected]> wrote:

Is there an ng for fixing the types of things the service brings p as
errors? I ran a page done up my Angelfire and the validation service
found errors. Not much I can do about this page, but was curious to
know what to do when it finds errors on something I've done up.

As Q said, start with the first error and run it again. Many times other errors
reported disappear when previous errors are fixed. That's cascading errors, or,
the program reporting got completely lost in an early error and reported many
others that are not errors.

http://www.w3schools.com/ is a nice source of info.

I have had quite a bit of luck checking errors in PSPad (~2.8 meg dl). It's a
great programming editor and general editor too. Just the HTML tools alone are
worth the download. I think it's safe to say that most errors are missing tags.

PsPad jumps to the first error, highlighting the line and explaining (doing it's
best try at least) why there is a problem on that line. It's very similar to the
online HTML test, but it's done... in an editor, so you can fix it promptly and
have another go at it to see if there are more errors.

http://www.pspad.com/en/index.html

I think you'll discover most of your errors are simply missing end tags, or
possibly misaligned list or table tags. It can be frustrating, but hang in
there!

 

[dszady]

I originally posted "Firefox not ready for primetime" and
there were a lot of responses. One post asked for specific
examples of sites that did not work properly. Here is one,

[...]
Run it through the validator yourself:
http://validator.w3.org/

I'm assuming this page is updated as the needs arises?

Is there an ng for fixing the types of things the service brings p as
errors? I ran a page done up my Angelfire and the validation service
found errors. Not much I can do about this page, but was curious to
know what to do when it finds errors on something I've done up. [...]

This is a case of a web page being poorly coded, not FF's
ability to render it.

Run pages though the Validator as you code them on FF or Mozilla. Fix them
one step at a time until they are 4.01 or 1.0 compliant and then feel your
face drop as you render them in IE. It is f***ing ridiculous!

alt.html or alt.html.tags are places to get your questions answered.
But the cool thing is, if you can solve one warning/error in the Validator
if may solve over a thousand lines. (e.g. <ul> without an end tag - or </A>
no it's gotta be </a> all lowercase in xhtml)
Then go to IE to break your heart

There is a silver lining. The discrepancies between Mozilla-based browsers
and IE are small and getting smaller.

 

[POKO]

There is a silver lining. The discrepancies between Mozilla-based browsers
and IE are small and getting smaller.

It still breaks a lot of javascripts Daryl which is part of the reason I
went back to IE as my default. Ya, I know.....
indecisivePOKO
--
P. Keenan - Webmaster
Web Page Design
Manitoulin Island, Canada
http://manitoulinislandwebdesign.it-mate.co.uk/
(e-mail address removed)

 

[REM]

POKO <[email protected]> wrote:

It still breaks a lot of javascripts Daryl which is part of the reason I
went back to IE as my default. Ya, I know.....
indecisivePOKO

What java scripts can you not be happy without?

I haven't seen any do very much that is impressive, but I usually have it turned
off anyway. I saw one that could make your video output simulate an earthquake.
I just don't get it I think. That's not what I'm looking for.

 

[dszady]

It still breaks a lot of javascripts Daryl which is part of the reason I
went back to IE as my default. Ya, I know.....
indecisivePOKO

Are you talking about FF only?
The wife's machine has both Firefox and IE on it. I have Mozilla 1.6.
I hope I have it covered.
I have a js that doesn't seem to work in IE for some reason.
Maybe I'll upload the pages later tonight so you can check it out.
http://www.earths-ocular.com

 

[POKO]

POKO wrote:

Are you talking about FF only?
The wife's machine has both Firefox and IE on it. I have Mozilla 1.6.
I hope I have it covered.
I have a js that doesn't seem to work in IE for some reason.
Maybe I'll upload the pages later tonight so you can check it out.
http://www.earths-ocular.com

My web page for example. The navigation links do not work in FF so I had
to apply extra coding.
POKO
--
P. Keenan - Webmaster
Web Page Design
Manitoulin Island, Canada
http://manitoulinislandwebdesign.it-mate.co.uk/
(e-mail address removed)

 

[POKO]

I haven't seen any do very much that is impressive, but I usually have it turned
off anyway. I saw one that could make your video output simulate an earthquake.
I just don't get it I think. That's not what I'm looking for.

A lot of people prefer plain text where you don't need it, but most
people have scripting running in their browsers. Believe me, you can do
a lot with javascript as a webmaster.
POKO
--
P. Keenan - Webmaster
Web Page Design
Manitoulin Island, Canada
http://manitoulinislandwebdesign.it-mate.co.uk/
(e-mail address removed)

 

[fitwell]

As Q said, start with the first error and run it again. Many times other errors
reported disappear when previous errors are fixed. That's cascading errors, or,
the program reporting got completely lost in an early error and reported many
others that are not errors.

Good point.

http://www.w3schools.com/ is a nice source of info.

I have had quite a bit of luck checking errors in PSPad (~2.8 meg dl). It's a
great programming editor and general editor too. Just the HTML tools alone are
worth the download. I think it's safe to say that most errors are missing tags.

PsPad jumps to the first error, highlighting the line and explaining (doing it's
best try at least) why there is a problem on that line. It's very similar to the
online HTML test, but it's done... in an editor, so you can fix it promptly and
have another go at it to see if there are more errors.

Kewl, sounds like a must-have!

http://www.pspad.com/en/index.html

I think you'll discover most of your errors are simply missing end tags, or
possibly misaligned list or table tags. It can be frustrating, but hang in
there!

That's good to know. I have archaic html knowledge, probably. I tend
to hard-code so my knowledge is old and apparently old html is not
always good. I'm going to try PsPad. It sounds like a winner. I use
Arachnophilia and it highlights tag and text in certain colours,
depending on what it is. So if I see one colour throughout, I know
I've made a booboo somewhere <g>. But that's not the same as being
told what a problem is.

Thanks!

 

[fitwell]

And it came to pass that RipVanWinkle wrote:

I originally posted "Firefox not ready for primetime" and
there were a lot of responses. One post asked for specific
examples of sites that did not work properly. Here is one, [...]
Run it through the validator yourself:
http://validator.w3.org/

I'm assuming this page is updated as the needs arises?

Is there an ng for fixing the types of things the service brings p as
errors? I ran a page done up my Angelfire and the validation service
found errors. Not much I can do about this page, but was curious to
know what to do when it finds errors on something I've done up. [...]

This is a case of a web page being poorly coded, not FF's
ability to render it.

Run pages though the Validator as you code them on FF or Mozilla. Fix them
one step at a time until they are 4.01 or 1.0 compliant and then feel your
face drop as you render them in IE. It is f***ing ridiculous!

alt.html or alt.html.tags are places to get your questions answered.
But the cool thing is, if you can solve one warning/error in the Validator
if may solve over a thousand lines. (e.g. <ul> without an end tag - or </A>
no it's gotta be </a> all lowercase in xhtml)
Then go to IE to break your heart

There is a silver lining. The discrepancies between Mozilla-based browsers
and IE are small and getting smaller.

Awesome, thanks so much for the tips!

 

[peter online]

It's the WEBMASTER'S fault for not conforming to WC3 standards. They
wrote that site to work correctly in IE only, hence why it fails in FF.[...]

[...]There's probably more badly written web sites than
Firefox users.[/QUOTE]

No problems at all wiht Firefox 0.9.3, I wihs all sites would open as fast as
this one (with a 2MB/s DSL connection, I should add.)