big problems with browser compatibility!

[Tom Pepper Willett]

Murray:

Thanks for clarifying.

I build at 740-750, myself.


--
===
Tom "Pepper" Willett
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
---
About FrontPage 2003:
http://office.microsoft.com/home/office.aspx?assetid=FX01085802
FrontPage 2003 Product Information:
http://www.microsoft.com/office/frontpage/prodinfo/default.mspx
Understanding FrontPage:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/office/understanding/frontpage/
===
| I don't challenge your post at all, Tom. In fact I think it should be
hung
| on the monitor of every user.
|
| The point I was making with Ron's post is that screen resolution only
tells
| you what the maximum width/height of a browser viewport could be - it does
| not tell you what the dimensions are of the specified individual. You
| cannot determine that until it's too late to do something about it, doncha
| know.
|
| My philosophy is this -
|
| Unless I have a compelling reason NOT to do so (and I haven't yet), my
sites
| are built at 760px width. That's my number and I go with it. I don't
worry
| about the ramifications, because I think it's a reasonable number. It
| happens to be the available horizontal space when you have a maximized
| browser viewport on an 800x600 screen, and I understand that by choosing
| that number I may be asking some visitors with 800x600 screens to scroll
| horizontally. Oh, well. That's life. It's also reflective of the people
| for whom I build sites. Your mileage may vary.... 8)
|
| --
| Murray
|
| | >I see. Therefore, the "etched in stone" reply you made is also
| >meaningless,
| > since Ron gave a statistic of 50%. So, why is it "etched in stone"?
| >
| > I would like to see both of you cite, since you challenge.
| >
| > Where do you get your statistics, Murray? ;-)
| > --
| > ===
| > Tom "Pepper" Willett
| > Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
| > ---
| > About FrontPage 2003:
| > http://office.microsoft.com/home/office.aspx?assetid=FX01085802
| > FrontPage 2003 Product Information:
| > http://www.microsoft.com/office/frontpage/prodinfo/default.mspx
| > Understanding FrontPage:
| > http://msdn.microsoft.com/office/understanding/frontpage/
| > ===
| > | > | Of course it's a meaningless statistic....
| > |
| > | --
| > | Murray
| > |
| > | | > | > According to the latest stats at www.echoecho.com
| > | >
| > | > 48% use 1024 x 768
| > | > 39% use 800 x 600
| > | >
| > | > That's a drastic change from the past. I would suggest it's because
| > out
| > | > of
| > | > the box computers are now set at the higher screen resolutions.
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > ===
| > | > Tom "Pepper" Willett
| > | > Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
| > | > ---
| > | > About FrontPage 2003:
| > | > http://office.microsoft.com/home/office.aspx?assetid=FX01085802
| > | > FrontPage 2003 Product Information:
| > | > http://www.microsoft.com/office/frontpage/prodinfo/default.mspx
| > | > Understanding FrontPage:
| > | > http://msdn.microsoft.com/office/understanding/frontpage/
| > | > ===
| > | > | > | > | Regard this post as etched in stone. It's good advice through and
| > | > | through....
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | Murray
| > | > |
| > | > | | > | > | > The following are personal opinions, others may not agree and
they
| > | > won't
| > | > | > be wrong.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Also bear in mind that my web sites are personal, not business,
| > and
| > | > are
| > | > | > built to look good in the latest browsers, and be functional in
| > older
| > | > | > models.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Design for 800x600 browser - nearly half the PC users use a
screen
| > | > | > resolution of 800x600, and many others use their browsers in
| > windows,
| > | > | > smaller than full screen. In FP2003 set up the design window at
| > | > 760x425.
| > | > | > Fit the width of the page into that and it will suit 99% of
users
| > and
| > | > | > browsers.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Set the Authoring settings (Tools->Page Options - Authoring
tab):
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Browsers: set to Custom
| > | > | > Schema Version: Internet Explorer 5.0
| > | > | > Tick all the boxes except: VML graphics, ActiveX controls, PNG
| > | > graphics,
| > | > | > Java applets. Java may not be available on Windows XP or in
IE6,
| > PNG
| > | > | > images will not be visible in some browsers, and ActiveX is IE
| > only
| > | > and
| > | > | > often blocked.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Generator and ProgID tags is your choice, makes no difference to
| > the
| > | > page.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Using Layers: Used properly, layers are fine and are compatible
| > with
| > | > all
| > | > | > browsers (except Opera 4, but who uses Opera 4?). If you use
| > layers,
| > | > do
| > | > | > not set the height. Do not place a layer inside a table cell,
and
| > | > watch
| > | > | > for trouble if you nest them (avoid nesting). Also beware of
| > users
| > | > who
| > | > | > change font sizes - this is a cause of problems with layers if
you
| > are
| > | > not
| > | > | > prepared for it.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Using tables for layout is nearly always safe. The layout on
your
| > | > page
| > | > | > can be built using tables.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > --
| > | > | > Ron Symonds (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
| > | > | > Reply only to group - emails will be deleted unread.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > message
| > | > | > | > | > | >>I can't say that the news is good but your help is most
| > appreciated.
| > I
| > | > | >> understand what you are telling me but quite honestly, I'm
almost
| > | > afraid
| > | > | >> to
| > | > | >> try again! How do you think I should set my authoring
| > properties/page
| > | > | >> size?
| > | > | >> Should I stay away from layers?
| > | > | >>
| > | > | >> "Ronx" wrote:
| > | > | >>
| > | > | >>> I would start again, using tables to position elements, and
lose
| > the
| > | > | >>> Word
| > | > | >>> Art and Text Boxes.
| > | > | >>>
| > | > | >>> For a web page, you need a completely different mind set to
| > | > designing
| > | > a
| > | > | >>> printed page. A web page has no dimensions - it's as wide as
| > the
| > | > | >>> browser
| > | > | >>> (and sometimes wider), and as long as needed to get to the
end.
| > | > | >>>
| > | > | >>> Also, see my other post.
| > | > | >>>
| > | > | >>> --
| > | > | >>> Ron Symonds (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
| > | > | >>> Reply only to group - emails will be deleted unread.
| > | > | >>>
| > | > | >>>
in
| > | > message
| > | > | >>> | > | > | >>> >I did use absolute positioning and most of the content is
| > placed
| > in
| > | > | >>> >layers.
| > | > | >>> > With lots of experience in page layout software and none in
| > web
| > | > | >>> > development,
| > | > | >>> > I apparantly created the site with the wrong frame of mind.
I
| > | > reviewed
| > | > | >>> > some
| > | > | >>> > of the on-line training that I took initially and still fail
| > to
| > | > see
| > | > | >>> > where
| > | > | >>> > this obviously important step is clearly noted. So while I
am
| > busy
| > | > | >>> > kicking
| > | > | >>> > myself, could you tell me what you would do at this point?
| > | > | >>> > "Ronx" wrote:
| > | > | >>> >
| > | > | >>> >> Changing settings in FrontPage now is like shutting the
| > | > proverbial
| > | > | >>> >> stable
| > | > | >>> >> door.... The settings in FP prevent components being used,
| > they
| > | > do
| > | > | >>> >> not
| > | > | >>> >> change anything that has already been done.
| > | > | >>> >>
| > | > | >>> >> From your very brief description of the problems I _guess_
| > that
| > | > you
| > | > | >>> >> have
| > | > | >>> >> used absolute positioning. Used carefully AP will not
cause
| > a
| > | > | >>> >> problem in
| > | > | >>> >> modern browsers (including NN4). Used carelessly, the
| > | > overlapping
| > | > | >>> >> text
| > | > | >>> >> and
| > | > | >>> >> graphics layers will be prevalent if the browser window is
| > not
| > at
| > | > the
| > | > | >>> >> design
| > | > | >>> >> size.
| > | > | >>> >>
| > | > | >>> >> A URL will enable a better answer.
| > | > | >>> >>
| > | > | >>> >> --
| > | > | >>> >> Ron Symonds (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
| > | > | >>> >> Reply only to group - emails will be deleted unread.
| > | > | >>> >>
| > | > | >>> >>
| > | > | >>> >> "Surfin Local" <Surfin (e-mail address removed)>
wrote
| > in
| > | > | >>> >> message
| > | > | >>> >> | > | > | >>> >> >I created a website in FP 2003 without understanding that
I
| > | > needed
| > | > | >>> >> >to
| > | > | >>> >> >choose
| > | > | >>> >> > the correct authoring properties for consistent viewing
in
| > | > | >>> >> > different
| > | > | >>> >> > browsers. After publishing the site, I asked several
people
| > to
| > | > | >>> >> > visit
| > | > | >>> >> > and
| > | > | >>> >> > provide input. One person viewed the site in IE 5.0 (IE
| > version
| > | > 6
| > | > | >>> >> > is on
| > | > | >>> >> > the
| > | > | >>> >> > local drive) and noted several problems with the layering
| > of
| > | > text
| > | > | >>> >> > and
| > | > | >>> >> > graphics. The site was also viewed in Netscape 4.7 where
it
| > was
| > | > | >>> >> > completely
| > | > | >>> >> > unusable. Can I simply change those settings or do I have
a
| > | > major
| > | > | >>> >> > problem?
| > | > | >>> >> > If
| > | > | >>> >> > I can just change the settings, can I use the remote site
| > or
| > do
| > | > I
| > | > | >>> >> > need
| > | > | >>> >> > to
| > | > | >>> >> > make the change on the local and re-publish? Thanks.
| > | > | >>> >>
| > | > | >>> >>
| > | > | >>> >>
| > | > | >>>
| > | > | >>>
| > | > | >>>
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Murray]

That's a good number too. Nice karma around 740. 8)

 

[Guest]

You have been more than kind today. Thank you for your time. You know, I was
very happy with the site - able to use the "tools" I was familiar with and
make it look the way I wanted. It functioned great from my computer and some
others that I had checking. I am amazed that so many of the features offered
are quite disfunctional or "particular" in the broader scope. Obviously,
experience in page layout is helpful but only a small part of the picture. I
suppose that Microsoft assumes a person using the software has some knowledge
of web design software but it sure would have been great to have some "do's
and don'ts" way back at the Getting Started point! I'm hoping that a Miller
Lite will help me decide whether to take your help and try again or take out
my wallet and pay for someone else's knowledge! Sue/Surfin Local, Inc.

 

[Guest]

P.S. "Experienced and beginner Web developers can pick up FrontPage and start
using it right out of the box." As stated by Microsoft. Hmmm. Sounded good to
me.

 

[=?Windows-1252?Q?Rob_Giordano_\=28aka:_Crash_Gordo]

Well, you can...but if a person were previously experienced in print (I was) you could easily go astray.

btw...Foster's will solve problems quicker than Miller Lite

Hey, but your site looks good...not alls ya gotta do if fix it.


| P.S. "Experienced and beginner Web developers can pick up FrontPage and start
| using it right out of the box." As stated by Microsoft. Hmmm. Sounded good to
| me.
| "Ronx" wrote:
|
| > The following are personal opinions, others may not agree and they won't be
| > wrong.
| >
| > Also bear in mind that my web sites are personal, not business, and are
| > built to look good in the latest browsers, and be functional in older
| > models.
| >
| > Design for 800x600 browser - nearly half the PC users use a screen
| > resolution of 800x600, and many others use their browsers in windows,
| > smaller than full screen. In FP2003 set up the design window at 760x425.
| > Fit the width of the page into that and it will suit 99% of users and
| > browsers.
| >
| > Set the Authoring settings (Tools->Page Options - Authoring tab):
| >
| > Browsers: set to Custom
| > Schema Version: Internet Explorer 5.0
| > Tick all the boxes except: VML graphics, ActiveX controls, PNG graphics,
| > Java applets. Java may not be available on Windows XP or in IE6, PNG images
| > will not be visible in some browsers, and ActiveX is IE only and often
| > blocked.
| >
| > Generator and ProgID tags is your choice, makes no difference to the page.
| >
| >
| > Using Layers: Used properly, layers are fine and are compatible with all
| > browsers (except Opera 4, but who uses Opera 4?). If you use layers, do not
| > set the height. Do not place a layer inside a table cell, and watch for
| > trouble if you nest them (avoid nesting). Also beware of users who change
| > font sizes - this is a cause of problems with layers if you are not prepared
| > for it.
| >
| > Using tables for layout is nearly always safe. The layout on your page can
| > be built using tables.
| >
| > --
| > Ron Symonds (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
| > Reply only to group - emails will be deleted unread.
| >
| >
| > | > >I can't say that the news is good but your help is most appreciated. I
| > > understand what you are telling me but quite honestly, I'm almost afraid
| > > to
| > > try again! How do you think I should set my authoring properties/page
| > > size?
| > > Should I stay away from layers?
| > >
| > > "Ronx" wrote:
| > >
| > >> I would start again, using tables to position elements, and lose the Word
| > >> Art and Text Boxes.
| > >>
| > >> For a web page, you need a completely different mind set to designing a
| > >> printed page. A web page has no dimensions - it's as wide as the browser
| > >> (and sometimes wider), and as long as needed to get to the end.
| > >>
| > >> Also, see my other post.
| > >>
| > >> --
| > >> Ron Symonds (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
| > >> Reply only to group - emails will be deleted unread.
| > >>
| > >>
| > >> | > >> >I did use absolute positioning and most of the content is placed in
| > >> >layers.
| > >> > With lots of experience in page layout software and none in web
| > >> > development,
| > >> > I apparantly created the site with the wrong frame of mind. I reviewed
| > >> > some
| > >> > of the on-line training that I took initially and still fail to see
| > >> > where
| > >> > this obviously important step is clearly noted. So while I am busy
| > >> > kicking
| > >> > myself, could you tell me what you would do at this point?
| > >> > "Ronx" wrote:
| > >> >
| > >> >> Changing settings in FrontPage now is like shutting the proverbial
| > >> >> stable
| > >> >> door.... The settings in FP prevent components being used, they do
| > >> >> not
| > >> >> change anything that has already been done.
| > >> >>
| > >> >> From your very brief description of the problems I _guess_ that you
| > >> >> have
| > >> >> used absolute positioning. Used carefully AP will not cause a problem
| > >> >> in
| > >> >> modern browsers (including NN4). Used carelessly, the overlapping
| > >> >> text
| > >> >> and
| > >> >> graphics layers will be prevalent if the browser window is not at the
| > >> >> design
| > >> >> size.
| > >> >>
| > >> >> A URL will enable a better answer.
| > >> >>
| > >> >> --
| > >> >> Ron Symonds (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
| > >> >> Reply only to group - emails will be deleted unread.
| > >> >>
| > >> >>
| > >> >> message
| > >> >> | > >> >> >I created a website in FP 2003 without understanding that I needed to
| > >> >> >choose
| > >> >> > the correct authoring properties for consistent viewing in different
| > >> >> > browsers. After publishing the site, I asked several people to visit
| > >> >> > and
| > >> >> > provide input. One person viewed the site in IE 5.0 (IE version 6 is
| > >> >> > on
| > >> >> > the
| > >> >> > local drive) and noted several problems with the layering of text
| > >> >> > and
| > >> >> > graphics. The site was also viewed in Netscape 4.7 where it was
| > >> >> > completely
| > >> >> > unusable. Can I simply change those settings or do I have a major
| > >> >> > problem?
| > >> >> > If
| > >> >> > I can just change the settings, can I use the remote site or do I
| > >> >> > need
| > >> >> > to
| > >> >> > make the change on the local and re-publish? Thanks.
| > >> >>
| > >> >>
| > >> >>
| > >>
| > >>
| > >>
| >
| >
| >

 

[Ronx]

Tom,
I use the stats at http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
which shows that 800x600 screens are used by 34% of users (October)
and 61% use 1024x768 or greater.
For the purposes of this post I consider 34% to be "nearly half".
However, I do not know how "trustworthy" these stats (or those on echoecho)
are: People visiting these sites tend to be web developers, who, by
visiting, may be influencing the stats. unduly.

Most of the people I know, or have seen, using a browser at full screen
either build web sites or use 800x600 resolution.

 

[Ronx]

Have another go.
Draw a grid on a sheet of paper, with 1/2 inch margins - that's very roughly
an 800px wide browser.
Place the text and other components of your page into the grid, changing the
rows and columns to suit.
Open FrontPage, open your web and start a new page.
Insert a table with the same rows and columns, and place the components into
the table cells.
Basic page layout done.

For your word art, use Word to make the Word Art, Copy it to the clip-board,
then paste into a graphics editor. Crop the image, then save as a .jpg.
Import the image into FrontPage.

If you get stuck, post back here.

 

[Clark]

Out of curiosity, why would a user at 800 by 600 have to scroll
horizontally at 740 wide site? A browser that is not maximized?

I use 600 wide as a width just to be extra sure, but probably that is
being too conservative --

 

[Murray]

Out of curiosity, why would a user at 800 by 600 have to scroll

horizontally at 740 wide site? A browser that is not maximized?

Yes - just so. How many people do you see who browser in a maximized
viewport? Not many. Nobody on a Mac does.

 

[Guest]

OK. So just to be sure: Don't use autoshapes. Don't use wordart. How about
the simple rectangles/lines etc.? Basically don't use anything on the drawing
toolbar? Are the web components safe? Also, I am confused on why you don't
want me to accomodate NN in the authoring properties. And I hate to ask this
question but I will. I looked at demos of other web design software
(dreamweaver/go live). Liked the simplicity of FP much more. But do you think
they have the capacity for creating these graphic design elements
"internally" or no matter what software is used, the elements are best
created elsewhere and imported as images?

 

[Murray]

But do you think

they have the capacity for creating these graphic design elements
"internally" or no matter what software is used, the elements are best
created elsewhere and imported as images?

Your last statement is the correct one. No matter what you use as an
authoring system, you are best advised to use images for such effects.

The issue is not authoring systems, it's the capabilities of HTML to
display/render such things.

Given the questions you have asked, I think you have made the right choice
for authoring systems - at least for the short term.

 

[Guest]

Thanks, Murray. I guess Ronx is either busy or tired of me! Any way you could
address the other issues I presented in my last post to him?

 

[Ronx]

In general, don't use anything on the drawing toolbar.

Lines, arrows rectangles, shapes all use VML graphics which use absolute
positioning, and are only visible in IE5.5 on Windows.

Most of the web components are safe. The database components depend on your
server - must be Windows, others require FP2002 extensions.

Setting FrontPage to accommodate Netscape actually turns off some features
that Netscape can handle, or which will fail gracefully in Netscape. NN4
users (according to the stats.) amount to about 2% of users in the browser
wars. The other Netscape versions can do whatever IE can do (except VML
graphics and the marquee - and NN7 can use the marquee). It is a question
of compromise - maximise the featureset or maximise the audience, and how
far back in ancient browsers do you design for?
If you restrict the site to IE5.5 users and above (about 80% of users), use
anything on the drawing toolbar. If you want the other 20%, don't use that
toolbar.

I've never used Dreamweaver - never got through the learning curve. In my
opinion graphics should be done in a graphics program, use a tool designed
for the job.

Rectangles and lines can be constructed with tables, cell borders and other
HTML tricks in conjunction with CSS.

With experience and testing in different browsers you will learn what will
work, what will fail.

And if there is a problem, ask in this newsgroup.

 

[Ronx]

Busy

See my other post.