It's not worth worrying about. It's their website. If they don't want to
correct the problems with it, that's their perogative. I don't know how you
feel you can connect a website that doesn't display the same in two
different browsers to 9/11. Different browsers can often render objects
differently depending on the html standards they adhere too.
Casual Observer said:
Now I see what you are referring to. It's also off on the clients page.
It appears to be correct on any pages they have completed with text and
not displaying correctly on pages where they have not filled in the
information for the page yet. It's poor browser testing on their part,
but hardly worth asking someone to physically go to their place of
business to check up on them.
It's very refreshing for you to admit that you were less 'eagle-eyed'
than this old fella, Casual Observer'! <g>
I didn't wish to complicate matters by mentioning other pages displaying
incorrectly, but you are quite right.
It is not so much the web page errors which bother me. It is the
attitude of the individuals concerned. They purport to be IT
professionals yet they apparently failed to test their own web pages.
When I mentioned it, instead of saying "Crikey, we've slipped up there -
better fix it! Thanks Dave" they chose to slight me instead. Bad form
IMO!
The operation *may* be legitimate - there's no way for me to know.
However, Andrew Taylor is real, an Englishman like me but just happens
to live in Torronto.
It's just possible that a physical check could prevent another 9/11. Do
you still maintain that it's not worth caring about?
Dave