CSS Safari Problem (Mac)

Discussion in 'HTML' started by 0dev, Jul 13, 2007.

  1. 0dev

    0dev Guest

    0dev, Jul 13, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. 0dev

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    0dev <> wrote:

    > I'm trying to fix a CSS problem in Safari on Mac.
    >
    > The following page displays fine on Firefox and IE on Windows and
    > Linux:
    > http://tinyurl.com/2w9nl3
    >
    > The page has the following errors on Safari/Mac:
    > http://tinyurl.com/3yoj83
    > http://tinyurl.com/3xsdc2
    >
    > The problem is in the footer section (marked in the code with
    > comments).
    >
    > The CSS for that footer section is found at the bottom of this CSS
    > file:
    > http://tinyurl.com/32yk7p
    >
    > Why isn't it displaying correctly in Safari/Mac?


    In a sense, it does not display properly on any browser. Forget
    the countless reported validation errors, you have managed to
    somehow "fix" the font size of everything but "latest jazz news"
    and the calendar. And then they do break at bigger text sizes.

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jul 14, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. 0dev

    0dev Guest

    On Jul 13, 7:27 pm, dorayme wrote:
    > In article


    > > Why isn't it displaying correctly in Safari/Mac?

    >
    > In a sense, it does not display properly on any browser. Forget
    > the countless reported validation errors, you have managed to
    > somehow "fix" the font size of everything but "latest jazz news"
    > and the calendar. And then they do break at bigger text sizes.


    I didn't write the code except the footer links. I'm just trying to
    get a footer that will display on Safari/Mac as well as FF and IE.
    0dev, Jul 14, 2007
    #3
  4. 0dev wrote:
    > On Jul 13, 7:27 pm, dorayme wrote:
    >> In article

    >
    >>> Why isn't it displaying correctly in Safari/Mac?

    >> In a sense, it does not display properly on any browser. Forget
    >> the countless reported validation errors, you have managed to
    >> somehow "fix" the font size of everything but "latest jazz news"
    >> and the calendar. And then they do break at bigger text sizes.

    >
    > I didn't write the code except the footer links. I'm just trying to
    > get a footer that will display on Safari/Mac as well as FF and IE.
    >


    Think about this for one moment, even though you did not write the other
    code, if it is so malformed what are the chances that something you
    *add* would display properly without repairing what precedes it?

    Put this another way, no matter how well you construct a roof it will
    not hold up if the building and foundation are poorly constructed.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Jul 14, 2007
    #4
  5. 0dev

    cwdjrxyz Guest

    On Jul 13, 4:58 pm, 0dev <> wrote:
    > I'm trying to fix a CSS problem in Safari on Mac.


    > The following page displays fine on Firefox and IE on Windows and
    > Linux:http://tinyurl.com/2w9nl3


    Using the new Safari 3 for Windows on the XP OS, I see the problem
    also. I do not see the problem on Opera. This sort of problem
    sometimes can take a lot of time to solve. I would first get the page
    to validate as html 4.01 at the w3c validator. This may not solve the
    problem, buy at least you will have fewer potential problems to worry
    about. I sometimes find it more easy to write a new page than modify
    one someone else wrote. Everyone has their own style, and good
    documentation of what someone else had in mind often is missing.



    > The page has the following errors on Safari/Mac:http://tinyurl.com/3yoj83http://tinyurl.com/3xsdc2
    >
    > The problem is in the footer section (marked in the code with
    > comments).
    >
    > The CSS for that footer section is found at the bottom of this CSS
    > file:http://tinyurl.com/32yk7p
    >
    > Why isn't it displaying correctly in Safari/Mac?
    cwdjrxyz, Jul 14, 2007
    #5
  6. 0dev

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    cwdjrxyz <> wrote:

    > On Jul 13, 4:58 pm, 0dev <> wrote:
    > > I'm trying to fix a CSS problem in Safari on Mac.

    >
    > > The following page displays fine on Firefox and IE on Windows and
    > > Linux:http://tinyurl.com/2w9nl3

    >
    > Using the new Safari 3 for Windows on the XP OS, I see the problem
    > also. I do not see the problem on Opera. This sort of problem
    > sometimes can take a lot of time to solve.


    Yes, you can say that again. <g>

    Actually I came on back here to see if anyone has an answer to
    something that I have wanted but could not figure: in FF
    developer tools, you can outline elements and their css paths are
    are displayed in a field at top. How to be able to copy paste the
    text in the field?

    I was going to make a point to the OP about the line .... I force
    myself to type it from a screenshot I kept, something like:

    html > body > div#wrapper > div#MainRed > table > tbody > tr >td
    > table.footer-box> tbody > tr > td > table.footer-box > tbody> tr > td.listhostels > a


    No point in making a rude point about it now. But does anyone
    know a way of telling the field to stay still while the mouse
    gets there to copy it? Happily the Mac screenshot controls of
    Shift + Command + 4 "fixes" the mouse pointer while a snap is
    taken...

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jul 14, 2007
    #6
  7. dorayme <> writes:

    > Actually I came on back here to see if anyone has an answer to
    > something that I have wanted but could not figure: in FF
    > developer tools, you can outline elements and their css paths are
    > are displayed in a field at top. How to be able to copy paste the
    > text in the field?


    Mouse over an element, then *without moving the mouse* use cmd-tab to
    switch to another app. Then select the FF window's title bar to switch
    back; because all of the "mouse moved" events were sent to another app,
    and the mouse pointer is now outside the document area, the CSS path
    field hasn't changed.

    sherm--

    --
    Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
    Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
    Sherm Pendley, Jul 14, 2007
    #7
  8. 0dev

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    Sherm Pendley <> wrote:

    > dorayme <> writes:
    >
    > > Actually I came on back here to see if anyone has an answer to
    > > something that I have wanted but could not figure: in FF
    > > developer tools, you can outline elements and their css paths are
    > > are displayed in a field at top. How to be able to copy paste the
    > > text in the field?

    >
    > Mouse over an element, then *without moving the mouse* use cmd-tab to
    > switch to another app. Then select the FF window's title bar to switch
    > back; because all of the "mouse moved" events were sent to another app,
    > and the mouse pointer is now outside the document area, the CSS path
    > field hasn't changed.
    >
    > sherm--


    Sherm, you are a genius! There is no doubt about it. This is a
    nice bit of knowledge indeed. Thank you.

    You can say anything at all to me from now on and nothing will
    ever take you off the special list I keep that excludes folk from
    my attempts at withering criticisms, carping childish accusations
    and fantastic posings...

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jul 14, 2007
    #8
  9. 0dev

    Ben C Guest

    On 2007-07-13, 0dev <> wrote:
    > I'm trying to fix a CSS problem in Safari on Mac.
    >
    > The following page displays fine on Firefox and IE on Windows and
    > Linux:
    > http://tinyurl.com/2w9nl3
    >
    > The page has the following errors on Safari/Mac:
    > http://tinyurl.com/3yoj83
    > http://tinyurl.com/3xsdc2
    >
    > The problem is in the footer section (marked in the code with
    > comments).
    >
    > The CSS for that footer section is found at the bottom of this CSS
    > file:
    > http://tinyurl.com/32yk7p
    >
    > Why isn't it displaying correctly in Safari/Mac?


    The footer is a table, whose width is set to 760px.

    Inside its second row are three cells, with widths 316px, 225px, and one
    with a div whose outer margin width is 215px. You've also got 15px of
    padding on the first cell.

    That lot adds up to 771px. So the browser asks itself, well which do you
    want? 760px or 771px? Firefox picks 760px, Safari 771px. As it happens,
    you wanted 760px so Safari guessed wrong on this occasion.

    Easier to let the computer do what it's good at and add the numbers up
    for you, so just delete "width=225" from the middle cell in that row. The
    browser will give it whatever it can get away with to try to make the
    whole thing 760px wide.
    Ben C, Jul 14, 2007
    #9
  10. 0dev

    0dev Guest

    On Jul 13, 8:19 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <>
    wrote:
    > 0dev wrote:
    > > I didn't write the code except the footer links. I'm just trying to
    > > get a footer that will display on Safari/Mac as well as FF and IE.

    >
    > Think about this for one moment, even though you did not write the other
    > code, if it is so malformed what are the chances that something you
    > *add* would display properly without repairing what precedes it?


    I ran the page through two validators and most of the errors would not
    affect layout, or they were errors with the validators. For example,
    the W3C Validator says "end tag for element "HEAD" which is not
    open." But if you look at the HEAD element it opens and closes
    normally. Missing alt attributes and using "language" instead of
    "type" for scripts shouldn't affect the layout. The ampersands in the
    URLs shouldn't affect the layout.

    Can Safari/Mac handle proprietary attributes like "TOPMARGIN"?

    These are the main CSS rules for the footer:

    /* For footer navigation */
    ..footer-box {
    font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
    color: #fff;
    background-color: #830d12;
    }
    ..listhostels a:link, .listhostels a:visited {
    text-decoration: none;
    color: #fff;
    }
    ..listhostels a:hover {
    text-decoration: underline;
    color: #fff;
    }
    ..footer-box h1, .footer-box h2 {
    margin-top: 0;
    padding-top: 0;
    font-size: 12px;
    font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
    margin-bottom: 0;
    padding-bottom: 0;
    color: #fff;
    }
    ..listhostels {
    font-size: 9px;
    margin-top: 0;
    padding-top: 0;
    }

    Is there anything in there that Mac Safari handles differently than IE/
    FF that would cause the problem shown in the images linked to in the
    original post?
    0dev, Jul 16, 2007
    #10
  11. 0dev

    Ben C Guest

    On 2007-07-16, 0dev <> wrote:
    [...]
    > These are the main CSS rules for the footer:
    >
    > /* For footer navigation */
    > .footer-box {
    > font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
    > color: #fff;
    > background-color: #830d12;
    > }
    > .listhostels a:link, .listhostels a:visited {
    > text-decoration: none;
    > color: #fff;
    > }
    > .listhostels a:hover {
    > text-decoration: underline;
    > color: #fff;
    > }
    > .footer-box h1, .footer-box h2 {
    > margin-top: 0;
    > padding-top: 0;
    > font-size: 12px;
    > font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
    > margin-bottom: 0;
    > padding-bottom: 0;
    > color: #fff;
    > }
    > .listhostels {
    > font-size: 9px;
    > margin-top: 0;
    > padding-top: 0;
    > }
    >
    > Is there anything in there that Mac Safari handles differently than IE/
    > FF that would cause the problem shown in the images linked to in the
    > original post?


    The difference between Safari and FF is not in those styles but in the
    widths you've set on the table and on the cells in it. I explained this
    in an earlier post.
    Ben C, Jul 16, 2007
    #11
  12. 0dev

    0dev Guest

    On Jul 14, 6:36 am, Ben C <> wrote:
    > On 2007-07-13, 0dev <> wrote:
    > > Why isn't it displaying correctly in Safari/Mac?

    >
    > The footer is a table, whose width is set to 760px.
    >
    > Inside its second row are three cells, with widths 316px, 225px, and one
    > with a div whose outer margin width is 215px. You've also got 15px of
    > padding on the first cell.
    >
    > That lot adds up to 771px. So the browser asks itself, well which do you
    > want? 760px or 771px? Firefox picks 760px, Safari 771px. As it happens,
    > you wanted 760px so Safari guessed wrong on this occasion.
    >
    > Easier to let the computer do what it's good at and add the numbers up
    > for you, so just delete "width=225" from the middle cell in that row. The
    > browser will give it whatever it can get away with to try to make the
    > whole thing 760px wide.


    Thank you for your help. I've made the change and just need to find a
    Mac to test it on.

    Much appreciated...
    0dev, Jul 16, 2007
    #12
  13. 0dev

    Ben C Guest

    On 2007-07-16, 0dev <> wrote:
    > On Jul 14, 6:36 am, Ben C <> wrote:
    >> On 2007-07-13, 0dev <> wrote:
    >> > Why isn't it displaying correctly in Safari/Mac?

    >>
    >> The footer is a table, whose width is set to 760px.
    >>
    >> Inside its second row are three cells, with widths 316px, 225px, and one
    >> with a div whose outer margin width is 215px. You've also got 15px of
    >> padding on the first cell.
    >>
    >> That lot adds up to 771px. So the browser asks itself, well which do you
    >> want? 760px or 771px? Firefox picks 760px, Safari 771px. As it happens,
    >> you wanted 760px so Safari guessed wrong on this occasion.
    >>
    >> Easier to let the computer do what it's good at and add the numbers up
    >> for you, so just delete "width=225" from the middle cell in that row. The
    >> browser will give it whatever it can get away with to try to make the
    >> whole thing 760px wide.

    >
    > Thank you for your help. I've made the change and just need to find a
    > Mac to test it on.


    I don't have a Mac either, but Konqueror (Linux) was doing the same
    thing as your screenshot. Safari is based on Konqueror so it's probably
    the same issue.
    Ben C, Jul 16, 2007
    #13
  14. 0dev

    Bergamot Guest

    0dev wrote:
    >
    > errors with the validators. For example,
    > the W3C Validator says "end tag for element "HEAD" which is not
    > open." But if you look at the HEAD element it opens and closes
    > normally.


    FYI, that is not an error with the validator. It usually indicates an
    error somewhere else that affects parsing. Fix the other error, and the
    </head> error goes away, too.

    > Can Safari/Mac handle proprietary attributes like "TOPMARGIN"?


    It's foolish to expect Safari, or any other browser, to "handle"
    proprietary attributes in any way other than ignoring them altogether.

    --
    Berg
    Bergamot, Jul 16, 2007
    #14
  15. Scripsit Bergamot:

    > 0dev wrote:
    >>
    >> errors with the validators. For example,
    >> the W3C Validator says "end tag for element "HEAD" which is not
    >> open." But if you look at the HEAD element it opens and closes
    >> normally.

    >
    > FYI, that is not an error with the validator. It usually indicates an
    > error somewhere else that affects parsing.


    These days, such document errors typically reflect the common cluelessness
    of mixing HTML and XHTML. Using e.g. <meta ... /> in an HTML 4.01 document
    means, by specifications, that the "/" closes the meta tag and ">" is
    character data, which thus implicitly closes the head element and opens the
    body element. This goes, of course, far above the heads of authors who blame
    a validator for their own errors.

    > It's foolish to expect Safari, or any other browser, to "handle"
    > proprietary attributes in any way other than ignoring them altogether.


    Well, things _could_ be worse. A proprietary attribute might get interpreted
    by a browser other than its inventor's, in some other meaning.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jul 16, 2007
    #15
  16. 0dev

    0dev Guest

    On Jul 16, 5:01 pm, "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote:

    > These days, such document errors typically reflect the common cluelessness
    > of mixing HTML and XHTML. Using e.g. <meta ... /> in an HTML 4.01 document
    > means, by specifications, that the "/" closes the meta tag and ">" is
    > character data, which thus implicitly closes the head element and opens the
    > body element. This goes, of course, far above the heads of authors who blame
    > a validator for their own errors.



    No need to be rude. Thanks for the tip though.

    The closed meta tag was copied and pasted from Google's Webmaster
    Control Panel. I assumed that closing all elements in HTML was
    optional (e.g. closing tag of </p> is optional).
    0dev, Jul 19, 2007
    #16
  17. 0dev

    cwdjrxyz Guest

    On Jul 19, 12:39 pm, 0dev <> wrote:
    > On Jul 16, 5:01 pm, "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote:
    >
    > > These days, such document errors typically reflect the common cluelessness
    > > of mixing HTML and XHTML. Using e.g. <meta ... /> in an HTML 4.01 document
    > > means, by specifications, that the "/" closes the meta tag and ">" is
    > > character data, which thus implicitly closes the head element and opens the
    > > body element. This goes, of course, far above the heads of authors who blame
    > > a validator for their own errors.

    >
    > No need to be rude. Thanks for the tip though.
    >
    > The closed meta tag was copied and pasted from Google's Webmaster
    > Control Panel. I assumed that closing all elements in HTML was
    > optional (e.g. closing tag of </p> is optional).


    In html(notxhtml) closing of several tags such as <p></p> is optional.
    However in xml based languages, everything must be closed. This is one
    of the most important things to do, especially for many small devices,
    some of which do not even understand html and which often will not
    work if everything is not closed.. In the case of xhtml, many tags are
    carried over from html as well as some pure xml ones are used. When a
    tag has an optional closing tag such as <p> then the optional(in html)
    closing tag such as </p> must be used. When a tag such as <img blah>
    has no closing tag in html, the tag must be self closed in xhtml such
    as <img blah />. Actually the space between blah and / is there for
    practical reasons, since some older browsers, and a few not so old
    ones, will not understand the tag properly without the space. In many
    pure xml languages, such as SMIL, no space is required. Most PC
    browsers do not understand W3C SMIL 2 properly, although reader or
    viewer programs for it, including recent Real players do. IE6 does
    support a very watered down version of SMIL that works on IE browsers
    only. The W3C validator often will fault you if you use a self closing
    tag in an html program. This is correct, because it is not part of
    html. However, many, if not most, recent browsers in wide use will
    still work properly if you slip a self closed xhtml tag into a html
    4.01 document. I am in the habit of closing <p> etc even when optional
    when writing an xhtml 4.01 page. This helps prevent forgetting to do
    this when writing xml or xhtml. Also tags in xhtml must be in lower
    case, while case does not matter in html(although case is important in
    javascript.) Hence I write tags in lower case when writing xtml 4.01
    to help prevent making mistakes in xhtml or other languages where case
    is important. Errors such as wrong case or wrong closing tag can be
    difficult to catch. Many people tend to read what they thought they
    wrote rather than what they actually wrote. One big advantage of the
    W3C validator is that it often will catch such errors.
    cwdjrxyz, Jul 20, 2007
    #17
  18. 0dev

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Fri, 20 Jul 2007 02:29:31
    GMT cwdjrxyz scribed:

    > Also tags in xhtml must be in lower
    > case, while case does not matter in html(although case is important in
    > javascript.) Hence I write tags in lower case when writing xtml 4.01
    > to help prevent making mistakes in xhtml or other languages where case
    > is important.


    I've been doing that nigh-on 10 years since I first read somewhere for some
    reason it was a good idea (-according to the author), and, yes, it did
    help.

    --
    Neredbojias
    A self-made man who worships his creator
    Neredbojias, Jul 20, 2007
    #18
  19. Scripsit cwdjrxyz:

    > In html(notxhtml) closing of several tags such as <p></p> is optional.


    It seems that you don't know what "tag" means. Besides, you are not using
    any paragraph structure in your Usenet message.

    > However in xml based languages, everything must be closed. This is one
    > of the most important things to do, especially for many small devices,
    > some of which do not even understand html and which often will not
    > work if everything is not closed..


    People using such devices won't have a great experience on the Web anyway,
    since the vast majority of web pages are nowhere near valid XHTML, or even
    "well-formed XML".

    Yet the point is what I wrote in my message that you responded to, and
    indirectly quoted (as a quote inside a quote), though without having
    anything to say on my point: mixing HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0 is clueless. And
    as exemplified in this thread, it often results from copying markup without
    understanding it or the bigger context.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jul 20, 2007
    #19
  20. 0dev

    cwdjrxyz Guest

    On Jul 20, 3:10 am, "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote:
    > Scripsit cwdjrxyz:
    >
    > > In html(notxhtml) closing of several tags such as <p></p> is optional.

    >
    > It seems that you don't know what "tag" means. Besides, you are not using
    > any paragraph structure in your Usenet message.
    >
    > > However in xml based languages, everything must be closed. This is one
    > > of the most important things to do, especially for many small devices,
    > > some of which do not even understand html and which often will not
    > > work if everything is not closed..

    >
    > People using such devices won't have a great experience on the Web anyway,
    > since the vast majority of web pages are nowhere near valid XHTML, or even
    > "well-formed XML".


    This may be so where you live, but where I live very many people use
    small devices. Many of these people have used a PC for a long time. A
    few have used top main frame computers such as a Cray, such as
    installed in the computing building of a major petroleum company a few
    blocks from where I live.
    >
    > Yet the point is what I wrote in my message that you responded to, and
    > indirectly quoted (as a quote inside a quote), though without having
    > anything to say on my point: mixing HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0 is clueless. And
    > as exemplified in this thread, it often results from copying markup without
    > understanding it or the bigger context.


    In an answer to your comments, Odev gave information that you do not
    quote here. It is:

    _______________________________________________________________________________

    On Jul 16, 5:01 pm, "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote:

    > These days, such document errors typically reflect the common cluelessness
    > of mixing HTML and XHTML. Using e.g. <meta ... /> in an HTML 4.01 document
    > means, by specifications, that the "/" closes the meta tag and ">" is
    > character data, which thus implicitly closes the head element and opens the
    > body element. This goes, of course, far above the heads of authors who blame
    > a validator for their own errors.


    No need to be rude. Thanks for the tip though.

    The closed meta tag was copied and pasted from Google's Webmaster
    Control Panel. I assumed that closing all elements in HTML was
    optional (e.g. closing tag of </p> is optional)

    __________________________________________________________________________

    Some others than Odev might consider your response to this and some
    other posts from you rude. However, one might ask why your responses
    should be considered very important. Surely someone with such an
    attitude should write nearly perfect web pages. See below.
    >
    > --
    > Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/


    The main page to the site that you quote above has no errors. I assume
    the site belongs to you, or perhaps a relative, because jkorpela is in
    the url. If one looks at the many pages in the above site using the
    W3C html validator, one finds quite a few errors. Surely someone
    offering minute details and opinions on writing web pages should use
    completely valid html in the many pages describing this, regardless of
    who owns the pages. Below is a listing of the number of errors, if
    any, found in the mentioned site.

    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html - 6 errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/internet/index.html - 1 error
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/comm/index.html - 1 error
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/chars/index.html - 3 errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/chars/index.html - 3 errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/lang/index.html - 1 error
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/mathem/index.html - 1 error
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/soft/index.html - 2 errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/prog/index.html - 3 errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/legal/index.html - 1 error
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/misc/index.html - 3 errors

    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/wwwfi.html - no errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/internetfi/index.html - 1 error
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/viest/index.html - no errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/merkit/index.html - 1 error
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/normit/index.html - no errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/kielet/index.html - no errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/matikka/index.html - no errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/softa/index.html - 2 errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ohjelmointi/index.html - no errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/lait/index.html - no errors
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/muut/index.html - no errors

    The pages in Finnish have fewer errors than those in English. However,
    I would guess that far more people read the English pages than the
    Finnish ones. Actually there are few errors compared to much of what
    you find on the web. I recently looked at a page on MySpace.com that
    had well over 200 validation errors, and most of these were made in
    the MySpace code, not extra code added by the member of MySpace.

    Perhaps, in summary, let he who is without guilt cast the first stone.
    But since this is Usenet, many likely are aware that the theme song
    for Usenet is the old song "Anything Goes".
    cwdjrxyz, Jul 20, 2007
    #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. gabe garza

    Safari and Firefox on MAC OS X

    gabe garza, Mar 28, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    509
    gabe garza
    Mar 29, 2005
  2. =?Utf-8?B?U2FtMjAwMA==?=

    Can Mac Users With safari browser see the site with ASP.net

    =?Utf-8?B?U2FtMjAwMA==?=, Jul 22, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,604
    Juan T. Llibre
    Jul 22, 2005
  3. Nick Howes

    CSS Safari Problem

    Nick Howes, Nov 4, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    4,957
    Nick Howes
    Nov 7, 2003
  4. Simon Wigzell

    MAC Safari compatibility problem

    Simon Wigzell, Apr 10, 2006, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    75
    Simon Wigzell
    Apr 10, 2006
  5. Simon Wigzell

    MAC Safari compatibility problem 2

    Simon Wigzell, Apr 10, 2006, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    382
Loading...

Share This Page