 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneralPHPASPPerlColdFusionFlashHTML, CSS, ScriptsBrowsers |
Webmaster Forum / HTML, CSS, Scripts / CSS / April 2008IE problems.
Hi all, Please take a look at http://www.ianhobson.co.uk/test.htm It validates and works in Firefox exactly as required... ... but IE6 makes a complete mess of it. Does anyone have any ideas about how I can make IE play? I'm already torn out at least least half of my remaining hair with this. Nothing I have tried has convinced IE to do anything better. Many thanks Ian > Hi all, > > Please take a look at http://www.ianhobson.co.uk/test.htm Don't you mean, http://www.ianhobson.co.uk/bottom.php ? > It validates and works in Firefox exactly as required... > > ... but IE6 makes a complete mess of it. Your conception of "mess" would have helped. If you are referring to the one-row height in IE6, it is because that is what you are telling it to do. <textarea rows="1" cols="1"></textarea> Why the frames? ~10% of your visitors will not be able to use your Send button - those with JavaScript disabled or stripped by a firewall.  Signature-bts -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck >> http://www.ianhobson.co.uk/test.htm >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > <textarea rows="1" cols="1"></textarea> Only partially, I think. The reason is more the positioning rules. IE6 doesn't grok setting all 4 positions top, bottom, left and right. It seems to have managed left and right together, overriding the cols value, but not top and bottom so it remains 1 row. SignatureBerg I don't think you need to bother about IE6 any more, it is an old and very broken piece of software - it should no longer be used. Try IE7, or if you can, IE8beta. Alexander. > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Ian > I don't think you need to bother about IE6 any more, it is an old > and very broken piece of software - it should no longer be used. I don't think you need to bother about Windows any more, it is an old and very broken piece of software - it should no longer be used. SignatureTop-posting. What's the most irritating thing on Usenet? > I don't think you need to bother about IE6 any more, I think most professionals would strongly disagree. IE6 still (unfortunately) commands a very sizable portion of general browsing traffic. > it is an old and very broken piece of software True enough. > it should no longer be used. In an ideal world. > Try IE7, or if you can, IE8beta. Or, even better, leave IE by the wayside and use a real browser. > I think most professionals would strongly disagree. IE6 still > (unfortunately) commands a very sizable portion of general browsing > traffic. Professionals? Or people who don't know how to install a proper browser? ;) > > I think most professionals would strongly disagree. IE6 still > > (unfortunately) commands a very sizable portion of general browsing > > traffic. > > Professionals? Or people who don't know how to install a proper browser? ;) By all means, allow me to clarify. Most professional Web designers and developers would strongly disagree that you can abandon consideration for IE6, for the simple reason that so many people "don't know how to install a proper browser". ;-) In article <9cade88d-6331-4559-bc7b-29378994addf@1g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > > > I think most professionals would strongly disagree. IE6 still > > > (unfortunately) commands a very sizable portion of general browsing [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > for IE6, for the simple reason that so many people "don't know how to > install a proper browser". ;-) There is a misunderstanding from the start. Alexander is thinking about the OP and the OP (and everyone else except Alexander) is thinking about the OP's customers. Once you make this distinction, the problem disappears like when an apple is touched by a magic wand replaced by a cloud of silver hollywood stars. Signaturedorayme I don't do "customers".... ;) Code for people not browsers! > In article > <9cade88d-6331-4559-bc7b-29378994addf@1g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > disappears like when an apple is touched by a magic wand replaced by a > cloud of silver hollywood stars. > I don't do "customers".... ;) You do appear, however, to have this bloody annoying habbit of top posting. Do it again and I for one will ignore you henceforth. > Code for people not browsers! I don't know what you do for a living but I code for money. If that means I have to add the odd hack or two to make IE works for my *customers* visitors who use iE6 then so be it. I hope you add a disclaimer to any work you do that you intentionally ignore x% of viewers. SignatureRichard Killing all google groups posts The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org > Hi all, > > Please take a look at http://www.ianhobson.co.uk/test.htm > > It validates and works in Firefox exactly as required... Thanks to everyone for their rsponces. Some comments. I need frames partly because the whole app is in frames (circa 2002?) and a complete rewrite is not feasable, and partly because we want to disable bookmarking. Most customers have IE6, so that has to be got to work. I can't run IE7 or 8beta (win2k still), so testing on those will have to wait. However....I've cracked the problem using javascript. (and updated the files). Regards Ian > I need frames partly because the whole app is in frames (circa 2002?) > and a complete rewrite is not feasable, Ah. You didn't include that in your details. Frames were abandoned by their creator sometime around 1994, as I recall. > and partly because we want to disable bookmarking. Is this a public site? Do you know what search engines will provide their users? Your unframed page ... sans everything in the other frames. Do you know how easy it is to, for example, right-click in the frame and choose "This Frame > Open in new Tab (or window)" ? Signature-bts -Friends don't let friends drive Vista > > I need frames partly because the whole app is in frames (circa 2002?) > > and a complete rewrite is not feasable, > > Ah. You didn't include that in your details. And, of course, nor need he have, given his original question. Signaturedorayme |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.