IE not reading PICS tags correctly

[The Bicycling Guitarist]

Is anyone as shocked as I am by this? I applied the strictest level of
labelling to my entire web site, even though only a few of my one hundred
fifty pages are inappropriate for younger children. I just found out that
the "Content Advisor" for Internet Explorer allows browsers to visit those
bad pages, even though I clearly labelled their contents according to ICRA
rules. I checked with ICRA tech ops, and I am assured that I did everything
correctly but Microsoft's Content Advisor is not behaving as it should.
GASP!

 

[C.W.]

Is anyone as shocked as I am by this?

Considering all the other flaws in IE - not really.

Carol

 

[Richard]

Is anyone as shocked as I am by this? I applied the strictest level of
labelling to my entire web site, even though only a few of my one hundred
fifty pages are inappropriate for younger children. I just found out that
the "Content Advisor" for Internet Explorer allows browsers to visit
those bad pages, even though I clearly labelled their contents according
to ICRA rules. I checked with ICRA tech ops, and I am assured that I did
everything correctly but Microsoft's Content Advisor is not behaving as
it should. GASP!

And how exactly is a web browser to know what the content is of an image?
If the applied algorithyms say the site is acceptable, then all the pages
are passed through. Not just those pages you feel it shouldn't.

You might try adding some key words so that the advisor will pick up on them
and reject those pages.

 

[The Bicycling Guitarist]

The Bicycling Guitarist wrote:

And how exactly is a web browser to know what the content is of an image?
If the applied algorithyms say the site is acceptable, then all the pages
are passed through. Not just those pages you feel it shouldn't.

I applied the ICRA rules at the "strict" level, so gen true for my web site
in general including graphics directories (I don't have naughty pictures on
my site) but gen false for particular pages with specific code for what
specifically may be considered inappropriate by some. The gen true for my
web site and gen false for the particular page are both on that page
according to ICRA rules, but apparently that is what is throwing Content
Advisor. ICRA tells me that Content Advisor has changed how it works a
couple times since being released, and that it is not behaving as it should.

 

[SpaceGirl]

I applied the ICRA rules at the "strict" level, so gen true for my web
site in general including graphics directories (I don't have naughty
pictures on my site) but gen false for particular pages with specific
code for what specifically may be considered inappropriate by some. The
gen true for my web site and gen false for the particular page are both
on that page according to ICRA rules, but apparently that is what is
throwing Content Advisor. ICRA tells me that Content Advisor has changed
how it works a couple times since being released, and that it is not
behaving as it should.

You have to bear in mind that Internet Explorer doesn't render ANY of
the standards the way it should. It doesn't do HTML right. It doesn't do
CSS right. It has its own version of JavaScript. Need I go on? Dont be
shocked when IE doesn't work properly... test in FireFox if you want
perfection, and then scale down your site so that it works in IE too. IE
6 is a very old, very very outdated browser.

--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #

 

[The Bicycling Guitarist]

rules. I checked with ICRA tech ops, and I am assured that I did
everything correctly but Microsoft's Content Advisor is not behaving as it
should.

ICRA tech ops tried a workaround for IE's Content Advisor. It didn't work,
and now they will have to work to redo their labelling system. Not fair! Why
doesn't Microsoft create a "patch" for IE? It's not like Microsoft hasn't
done this before.

 

[The Bicycling Guitarist]

The Bicycling Guitarist wrote:
shocked when IE doesn't work properly... test in FireFox if you want
perfection, and then scale down your site so that it works in IE too. IE

Yes, I found that out recently when looking at a page of mine that had been
created by my ex- using nested tables back in 1998. The spacing was way off
when I looked at it in FireFox last week. I converted the layout using CSS
and divs, in the meantime going from transitional to strict markup. Now it
looks okay in IE and FireFox.

http://www.TheBicyclingGuitarist.net/pandora/pandy3.htm

If anyone has specific suggestions for further improvement, I am always
happy to make my site better!
I was trying to duplicate the original layout as closely as possible.

Tables? Bah! We don't need no stinkin' Tables!

 

[Andy Dingley]

And how exactly is a web browser to know what the content is of an image?

By the PICS rating, you idiot.

Please. Learn something or shut up.

 

[Andy Dingley]

Is anyone as shocked as I am by this?

PICS never really happened. It's a good idea and it's still a good
idea to label, but because there is so little adoption of it, the
usual way of browsing is to silently accept unlabelled sites. As a
result, there's even less incentive to add labels to new sites.

It's a few years since I looked seriously at PICS (although little has
changed since). Back then IE blew up if you used multiple "for"
statements, as I notice your site does.

If you support domain names as both http://www.example.org and
http://example.org then I suggest you use a rewrite rule in .htaccess
and only include http://example.org in your PICS metadata.