auto-stretching in IE

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Evert | Collab, Jul 20, 2005.

  1. Hi All,

    I have a <div> in my XHTML1.1 file, with the style rules:

    position: abolute;
    top: 0px;
    left: 10px;
    right: 8px;
    bottom: 24px;
    margin-top: 100px;

    As espected this works in Firefox, but it's giving me problems in IE 6.
    Any idea's how to overcome this in a way that is according to standards?

    regards,
    Evert
    Evert | Collab, Jul 20, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Evert | Collab

    Mark Parnell Guest

    Previously in alt.html, Evert | Collab <> said:

    > position: abolute;


    Sp. "absolute".

    <snip>

    > Any idea's how to overcome this in a way that is according to standards?


    Some sort of idea of what you are actually trying to do would be
    helpful. A URL speaks a thousand words...

    --
    Mark Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
    alt.html FAQ :: http://html-faq.com/
    Mark Parnell, Jul 20, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Evert | Collab

    saz Guest

    In article <P%iDe.3781$!nnrp1.uunet.ca>,
    says...
    > Hi All,
    >
    > I have a <div> in my XHTML1.1 file, with the style rules:
    >
    > position: abolute;
    > top: 0px;
    > left: 10px;
    > right: 8px;
    > bottom: 24px;
    > margin-top: 100px;
    >
    > As espected this works in Firefox, but it's giving me problems in IE 6.
    > Any idea's how to overcome this in a way that is according to standards?
    >
    > regards,
    > Evert
    >

    Giving a URL would help, as the problem could be elsewhere. More
    importantly, EXACTLY what are you trying to achieve.

    BTW, you misspelled "absolute", which could be a major part of your
    problem.
    saz, Jul 20, 2005
    #3
  4. saz wrote:
    > In article <P%iDe.3781$!nnrp1.uunet.ca>,
    > says...
    >
    >>Hi All,
    >>
    >>I have a <div> in my XHTML1.1 file, with the style rules:
    >>
    >>position: abolute;
    >>top: 0px;
    >>left: 10px;
    >>right: 8px;
    >>bottom: 24px;
    >>margin-top: 100px;
    >>
    >>As espected this works in Firefox, but it's giving me problems in IE 6.
    >>Any idea's how to overcome this in a way that is according to standards?
    >>
    >>regards,
    >>Evert
    >>

    >
    > Giving a URL would help, as the problem could be elsewhere. More
    > importantly, EXACTLY what are you trying to achieve.
    >
    > BTW, you misspelled "absolute", which could be a major part of your
    > problem.


    Yes you're right, I have spelled it correctly in my source though.. I'll
    include an example in the bottom of the post.
    If you want to see what I try to achief, open it in firefox; if you want
    to see what goes wrong, open it in IE

    Thanks for your time!

    Evert

    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C/DTD XHTML 1.1//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
    <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
    <head>
    <title>Test file</title>
    <style type="text/css">
    .container {
    position: absolute;
    top: 0px;
    left: 10px;
    right: 8px;
    bottom: 24px;
    margin-top: 100px;
    border: 1px solid #000;
    }
    </style>
    </head>
    <body>
    <div class="container">Yo</div>

    </body>
    </html>
    Evert | Collab, Jul 20, 2005
    #4
  5. Evert | Collab

    dorayme Guest

    > From: Evert | Collab <>
    >
    > Hi All,
    >
    > I have a <div> in my XHTML1.1 file, with the style rules:
    >
    > position: abolute;
    > top: 0px;
    > left: 10px;
    > right: 8px;
    > bottom: 24px;
    > margin-top: 100px;
    >
    > As espected this works in Firefox, but it's giving me problems in IE 6.
    > Any idea's how to overcome this in a way that is according to standards?



    An "s" in abolute perhaps?

    dorayme

    (Sorry, I couldn't resist... don't kill me.)
    dorayme, Jul 20, 2005
    #5
  6. Evert | Collab

    Spartanicus Guest

    Evert | Collab <> wrote:

    >I have a <div> in my XHTML1.1 file


    The exemption that XHTML that follows Appendix C guidelines may be
    served as text/html only applies to XHTML 1.0.

    --
    Spartanicus
    Spartanicus, Jul 20, 2005
    #6
  7. Spartanicus wrote:
    > Evert | Collab <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I have a <div> in my XHTML1.1 file

    >
    >
    > The exemption that XHTML that follows Appendix C guidelines may be
    > served as text/html only applies to XHTML 1.0.
    >


    I am aware of that, but this isn't really related to my problem.

    Evert
    Evert | Collab, Jul 20, 2005
    #7
  8. Evert | Collab

    Spartanicus Guest

    Evert | Collab <> wrote:

    >>>I have a <div> in my XHTML1.1 file

    >>
    >> The exemption that XHTML that follows Appendix C guidelines may be
    >> served as text/html only applies to XHTML 1.0.

    >
    >I am aware of that


    Then why are you violating the guidelines?

    --
    Spartanicus
    Spartanicus, Jul 20, 2005
    #8
  9. Spartanicus wrote:
    > Evert | Collab <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>>I have a <div> in my XHTML1.1 file
    >>>
    >>>The exemption that XHTML that follows Appendix C guidelines may be
    >>>served as text/html only applies to XHTML 1.0.

    >>
    >>I am aware of that

    >
    >
    > Then why are you violating the guidelines?
    >


    Who told you I was?

    To specify this, I have use the following line of php code:

    header('Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8');

    the http-equiv meta tag is a replacement for a normal http header. It's
    better to use the header, but if you can't for some reason you should
    use the http-equiv.

    thanks,
    Evert
    Evert | Collab, Jul 20, 2005
    #9
  10. Evert | Collab

    Spartanicus Guest

    Evert | Collab <> wrote:

    >>>>The exemption that XHTML that follows Appendix C guidelines may be
    >>>>served as text/html only applies to XHTML 1.0.
    >>>
    >>>I am aware of that

    >>
    >> Then why are you violating the guidelines?

    >
    >Who told you I was?


    You did by saying that you have an issue in IE, that means you are
    serving it as text/html, or it wouldn't work at all in IE.

    >To specify this, I have use the following line of php code:
    >
    >header('Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8');
    >
    >the http-equiv meta tag is a replacement for a normal http header.


    It's not. The http content-type header is the only thing that matters.

    >It's
    >better to use the header, but if you can't for some reason you should
    >use the http-equiv.


    You *are* using the http header, and it says text/html. If you are not
    able to change it, adding a meta declaration does not change the fact
    that you are violating the guidelines.

    --
    Spartanicus
    Spartanicus, Jul 20, 2005
    #10
  11. Spartanicus wrote:
    > Evert | Collab <> wrote:
    >
    >


    >
    > You *are* using the http header, and it says text/html. If you are not
    > able to change it, adding a meta declaration does not change the fact
    > that you are violating the guidelines.
    >


    Please tell me where you read text/html

    Evert
    Evert | Collab, Jul 20, 2005
    #11
  12. Evert | Collab

    Spartanicus Guest

    Evert | Collab <> wrote:

    >> You *are* using the http header, and it says text/html. If you are not
    >> able to change it, adding a meta declaration does not change the fact
    >> that you are violating the guidelines.

    >
    >Please tell me where you read text/html


    I repeat: You have an issue in IE, that means you are
    serving it as text/html, or it wouldn't work at all in IE.

    --
    Spartanicus
    Spartanicus, Jul 20, 2005
    #12
  13. Spartanicus wrote:
    > Evert | Collab <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>You *are* using the http header, and it says text/html. If you are not
    >>>able to change it, adding a meta declaration does not change the fact
    >>>that you are violating the guidelines.

    >>
    >>Please tell me where you read text/html

    >
    >
    > I repeat: You have an issue in IE, that means you are
    > serving it as text/html, or it wouldn't work at all in IE.
    >


    It does work in IE, it simply doesn't work as expected. Please try the
    file I included and see what I mean.. Have you even checked it?

    This is starting to look like a troll, I probably shouldn't respond to
    this anymore..

    I will try it on some other newsgroups

    regards,
    Evert
    Evert | Collab, Jul 20, 2005
    #13
  14. Evert | Collab

    Spartanicus Guest

    Evert | Collab <> wrote:

    >>>>You *are* using the http header, and it says text/html. If you are not
    >>>>able to change it, adding a meta declaration does not change the fact
    >>>>that you are violating the guidelines.
    >>>
    >>>Please tell me where you read text/html

    >>
    >> I repeat: You have an issue in IE, that means you are
    >> serving it as text/html, or it wouldn't work at all in IE.

    >
    >It does work in IE, it simply doesn't work as expected. Please try the
    >file I included and see what I mean.. Have you even checked it?


    We've been discussing your violation of w3c's guidelines for serving
    XHTML 1.1. Not what you wanted to discuss? Welcome to usenet.

    >This is starting to look like a troll, I probably shouldn't respond to
    >this anymore..
    >
    >I will try it on some other newsgroups


    Running away won't fix your violation of the guidelines.

    --
    Spartanicus
    Spartanicus, Jul 21, 2005
    #14
  15. Spartanicus wrote:
    > Evert | Collab <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > We've been discussing your violation of w3c's guidelines for serving
    > XHTML 1.1. Not what you wanted to discuss? Welcome to usenet.
    >
    >
    >>This is starting to look like a troll, I probably shouldn't respond to
    >>this anymore..
    >>
    >>I will try it on some other newsgroups

    >
    >
    > Running away won't fix your violation of the guidelines.
    >


    Allright,

    Please explain it to me and pretend I'm stupid. What should I do to fix
    my problem?

    Evert
    Evert | Collab, Jul 21, 2005
    #15
  16. Evert | Collab wrote:
    > Spartanicus wrote:
    >
    >> Evert | Collab <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> We've been discussing your violation of w3c's guidelines for serving
    >> XHTML 1.1. Not what you wanted to discuss? Welcome to usenet.
    >>
    >>
    >>> This is starting to look like a troll, I probably shouldn't respond
    >>> to this anymore..
    >>>
    >>> I will try it on some other newsgroups

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Running away won't fix your violation of the guidelines.
    >>

    >
    > Allright,
    >
    > Please explain it to me and pretend I'm stupid. What should I do to fix
    > my problem?
    >
    > Evert


    Ok, let's calm down here. What Spartanicus is trying to tell you is that
    your are specifying your document as XHTML1.1, the problem is to be
    valid XHTML1.1 the content type the server should send the document is
    'application/xhtml+xml'.

    see:
    http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/xhtml-media-types.xhtml#summary

    Now the problem here is IE does not support 'application/xhtml+xml' only
    'text/html'. The fact that your see anything at all IE means the
    document is being served as 'text/html' which means it is *not valid*
    'XHTML1.1' but 'XHTML 1.0 Transitional'. Now this is not exactly the
    problem you were asking about, but is a fundamental problem with your
    situation, and DOCTYPE does effect the render mode of the browser. If
    you have an invalid DOCTYPE the render mode of the browser will be
    unpredictable. Fix your basic error first then we can address the
    subsequent problems.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Jul 21, 2005
    #16
  17. >
    >
    > Ok, let's calm down here. What Spartanicus is trying to tell you is that
    > your are specifying your document as XHTML1.1, the problem is to be
    > valid XHTML1.1 the content type the server should send the document is
    > 'application/xhtml+xml'.
    >
    > see:
    > http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/xhtml-media-types.xhtml#summary
    >
    > Now the problem here is IE does not support 'application/xhtml+xml' only
    > 'text/html'. The fact that your see anything at all IE means the
    > document is being served as 'text/html' which means it is *not valid*
    > 'XHTML1.1' but 'XHTML 1.0 Transitional'. Now this is not exactly the
    > problem you were asking about, but is a fundamental problem with your
    > situation, and DOCTYPE does effect the render mode of the browser. If
    > you have an invalid DOCTYPE the render mode of the browser will be
    > unpredictable. Fix your basic error first then we can address the
    > subsequent problems.
    >

    Thanks for clearing that up Jonathan

    This makes a lot more sense now =) I immidiatly checked my script,
    activated application/xhtml+xml and now I see IE doesn't parse it. I
    really thought I had it like that before, but it now seems I didn't.
    Sorry spartanicus for missing that, but I think I just needed a better
    explanation.

    I tried out both text/xml and application/xml. Firefox renders them
    fine, but IE rambles about dtd problems.

    So what does this mean. There is no way to use XHTML1.1 in a browser?
    This means
    http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/xhtml-media-types.xhtml#summary
    (which also uses XHTML1.1 markup) is not valid (since it is served as
    text/html).

    If I'm correct I can change to XHTML 1.0 (HTML compatible). Just to be
    sure, can I still use strict?

    Thanks for pointing this out. I will give it a shot and hope it will
    also fix my original problem

    Evert
    Evert | Collab, Jul 21, 2005
    #17
  18. Evert | Collab wrote:

    > So what does this mean. There is no way to use XHTML1.1 in a browser?


    Well ... you can serve it as application/xml and apply client side XSLT, but
    that would be silly.

    > This means
    > http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/xhtml-media-types.xhtml#summary
    > (which also uses XHTML1.1 markup) is not valid (since it is served as
    > text/html).


    It is served as application/xhtml+xml.

    http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/ does content negotiation and sends
    either XHTML 1.1 or HTML 4.01 depending on the accept header the browser
    sends.

    Its a complete waste of time.

    > If I'm correct I can change to XHTML 1.0 (HTML compatible). Just to be
    > sure, can I still use strict?


    So long as you follow Appendix C, which makes it "compatible" with HTML -
    which means it will work alright on /most/ browsers, but some will still
    get it wrong as they foolishly beleve the HTML spec when it said that HTML
    was an SGML application.

    XHTML, even 1.0, is pretty much pointless on the client side for the vast
    majority of websites.

    --
    David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
    Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
    David Dorward, Jul 21, 2005
    #18
  19. Evert | Collab

    Spartanicus Guest

    "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:

    >Ok, let's calm down here. What Spartanicus is trying to tell you is that
    >your are specifying your document as XHTML1.1, the problem is to be
    >valid XHTML1.1 the content type the server should send the document is
    >'application/xhtml+xml'.


    Document validity depends on whether it conforms to the applicable DTD.
    Serving XHTML 1.1 as text/html doesn't make the document invalid, but it
    violates the guidelines as published by w3c.

    --
    Spartanicus
    Spartanicus, Jul 21, 2005
    #19
  20. Evert | Collab

    Spartanicus Guest

    Evert | Collab <> wrote:

    >> Running away won't fix your violation of the guidelines.

    >
    >Please explain it to me and pretend I'm stupid. What should I do to fix
    >my problem?


    Change the doctype declaration to XHTML 1.0 which may be served as
    text/html if it conforms to appendix c guidelines, or better yet stop
    lying about the content:
    http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/no-xhtml.htm

    --
    Spartanicus
    Spartanicus, Jul 21, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,270
  2. =?Utf-8?B?U3JpZGhhcg==?=

    stretching the background image instead of tiling

    =?Utf-8?B?U3JpZGhhcg==?=, Nov 23, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    8,197
    Mats Lycken
    Nov 30, 2005
  3. Arthur Dent

    Table stretching excessively in IE

    Arthur Dent, Mar 6, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,001
    slagomite
    Mar 7, 2006
  4. Lee Harris

    Image Stretching

    Lee Harris, Oct 27, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    506
    David Graham
    Oct 27, 2003
  5. linkswanted
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    901
Loading...

Share This Page