req help: correct this code

Discussion in 'HTML' started by net, Nov 26, 2003.

  1. net

    net Guest

    also posted to alt.html.critique
    -----------------------------

    this page:
    http://www.writers4management.com\index-old.htm
    doesn't work properly in Netscape, and I've tried it in both v4.7 and 7.1.
    The e-mail links 'info at writers4management dot com' and 'here'- near the
    bottom of the page are dead, however they work fine in IE, and I've tested
    it in IE v5.00 to v6/SP1.
    I tried using CSE HTML Validator v6.01 and it found a few errors which I
    corrected but that still didn't solve the problem.
    Can anyone see what the error is? Thanks for any help.
     
    net, Nov 26, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Quoth the raven named net:

    > also posted to alt.html.critique
    > -----------------------------


    Multipost: Bad
    Crosspost: Ok when necessary (but not this time)

    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html

    > this page:
    > http://www.writers4management.com\index-old.htm
    > doesn't work properly in Netscape, and I've tried it in both v4.7 and 7.1.
    > The e-mail links 'info at writers4management dot com' and 'here'- near the
    > bottom of the page are dead, however they work fine in IE, and I've tested
    > it in IE v5.00 to v6/SP1.
    > I tried using CSE HTML Validator v6.01 and it found a few errors which I
    > corrected but that still didn't solve the problem.
    > Can anyone see what the error is? Thanks for any help.


    I had a look at your page, found so much Microcrap that I decided
    against trying to weed out any errors. Besides, it fails to validate:
    <http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.writers4management.com%2Findex-old.htm&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=HTML+4.01+Transitional>
    ...and this is after I selected the least stringent of doctypes.

    Your page also does not fit in my browser window.
    http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?AnySizeDesign

    --
    -bts
    -This space intentionally left blank.
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Nov 26, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. net

    altamir Guest

    "net" <> wrote in news:3fc50290@212.67.96.135:

    > this page:
    > http://www.writers4management.com\index-old.htm
    > doesn't work properly in Netscape, and I've tried it in both v4.7 and
    > 7.1. The e-mail links 'info at writers4management dot com' and 'here'-
    > near the bottom of the page are dead, however they work fine in IE,
    > and I've tested it in IE v5.00 to v6/SP1.


    They're dead in IE5.5/win with font size set to medium.

    > I tried using CSE HTML Validator v6.01 and it found a few errors which
    > I corrected but that still didn't solve the problem.


    Why don't you use W3C validator?

    > Can anyone see what the error is?


    It's FrontPage.

    --
    altamir
     
    altamir, Nov 26, 2003
    #3
  4. net

    net Guest

    "altamir" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns943FE22D5E24Calt2003@213.180.128.20...
    > "net" <> wrote in news:3fc50290@212.67.96.135:
    >
    > > this page:
    > > http://www.writers4management.com\index-old.htm
    > > doesn't work properly in Netscape, and I've tried it in both v4.7 and
    > > 7.1. The e-mail links 'info at writers4management dot com' and 'here'-
    > > near the bottom of the page are dead, however they work fine in IE,
    > > and I've tested it in IE v5.00 to v6/SP1.

    >
    > They're dead in IE5.5/win with font size set to medium.
    >
    > > I tried using CSE HTML Validator v6.01 and it found a few errors which
    > > I corrected but that still didn't solve the problem.

    >
    > Why don't you use W3C validator?


    I did. It said first said there was a problem with the Document declaration.
    I changed this and then on retest W3 validator said it couldn't process the
    page for some other reason, which is where I gave up...
    >
    > > Can anyone see what the error is?

    >
    > It's FrontPage.


    you mean making the code with Frontpage was the error?
     
    net, Nov 27, 2003
    #4
  5. net

    net Guest

    "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <> wrote in message
    news:8v8xb.151610$...
    > Quoth the raven named net:
    >
    > > also posted to alt.html.critique
    > > -----------------------------

    >
    > Multipost: Bad
    > Crosspost: Ok when necessary (but not this time)
    >
    > http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html
    >
    > > this page:
    > > http://www.writers4management.com\index-old.htm
    > > doesn't work properly in Netscape, and I've tried it in both v4.7 and

    7.1.
    > > The e-mail links 'info at writers4management dot com' and 'here'- near

    the
    > > bottom of the page are dead, however they work fine in IE, and I've

    tested
    > > it in IE v5.00 to v6/SP1.
    > > I tried using CSE HTML Validator v6.01 and it found a few errors which I
    > > corrected but that still didn't solve the problem.
    > > Can anyone see what the error is? Thanks for any help.

    >
    > I had a look at your page, found so much Microcrap that I decided
    > against trying to weed out any errors.


    thanks for your feedback Beauregard, I agree the the code is so heavily
    Microcrap'd I've decided it's best to scrap it completely and rebuild the
    pages with friendlier cross-browser retro code.
     
    net, Nov 27, 2003
    #5
  6. net

    Mark Parnell Guest

    Sometime around Thu, 27 Nov 2003 23:03:24 -0000, net is reported to have
    stated:
    >
    > thanks for your feedback Beauregard, I agree the the code is so heavily
    > Microcrap'd I've decided it's best to scrap it completely and rebuild the


    Definitely. That means not in Frontpage. :)

    > pages with friendlier cross-browser retro code.


    Retro code? I hope you don't mean lots of deprecated presentational markup?

    --
    Mark Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
     
    Mark Parnell, Nov 27, 2003
    #6
  7. net

    altamir Guest

    "net" <> wrote in news:3fc65d95@212.67.96.135:

    >> Why don't you use W3C validator?

    >
    > I did. It said first said there was a problem with the Document
    > declaration. I changed this and then on retest W3 validator said it
    > couldn't process the page for some other reason, which is where I gave
    > up...


    You gave up to soon. If you have problems with validator, you can always
    ask people here. I'm sure they'll gladly help.

    >> > Can anyone see what the error is?

    >>
    >> It's FrontPage.

    >
    > you mean making the code with Frontpage was the error?


    That's what I mean. FP is the *worst* choice to make web pages. If you
    really have to use WYSIWYGs try something else, maybe Macromedia
    Dreamweaver? But if you think about making web pages seriously - get some
    decent text editor and start learning HTML, XHTML and CSS.

    --
    altamir
     
    altamir, Nov 28, 2003
    #7
  8. Quoth the raven named altamir:

    > That's what I mean. FP is the *worst* choice to make web pages.


    May I introduce you to Microsoft Word? :)

    --
    -bts
    -This space intentionally left blank.
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Nov 28, 2003
    #8
  9. net

    net Guest

    "altamir" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns9441DBBA7DE2Dalt2003@213.180.128.20...
    > "net" <> wrote in news:3fc65d95@212.67.96.135:
    >
    > > you mean making the code with Frontpage was the error?

    >
    > That's what I mean. FP is the *worst* choice to make web pages. If you
    > really have to use WYSIWYGs try something else, maybe Macromedia
    > Dreamweaver? But if you think about making web pages seriously - get some
    > decent text editor and start learning HTML, XHTML and CSS.


    actually, I didn't design the site, someone else did but I was asked to take
    a look and troubleshoot some problems with it. I decided in the end that the
    code needed replacing completely, right from scratch. Fortunately I use
    Dreamweaver and it all had a happy ending...
     
    net, Nov 28, 2003
    #9
  10. net

    net Guest

    "Mark Parnell" <> wrote in message
    news:vo36kw4nvmwk.lwtwz3tb0k9x$...
    > Sometime around Thu, 27 Nov 2003 23:03:24 -0000, net is reported to have
    > stated:


    > Retro code? I hope you don't mean lots of deprecated presentational

    markup?

    eh?
     
    net, Nov 28, 2003
    #10
  11. net

    rf Guest

    rf, Nov 29, 2003
    #11
  12. net

    Nico Schuyt Guest

    altamir wrote:

    > That's what I mean. FP is the *worst* choice to make web pages. If you
    > really have to use WYSIWYGs try something else, maybe Macromedia
    > Dreamweaver?


    My requirements for the perfect editor are:
    - a good stylesheet editor
    and - allows editing in wysiwyg
    and - enables applying styles from (multiple) internal- or external
    stylesheets
    and - has good support of PHP
    and - built in validator
    and - built in spell checker
    and - format selected paragraphs into a list and the other way around
    and - paste text from applications like Word as plain paragraps
    and - add width and height properties to an imported image and change them
    on refresh when the source image has changed
    and - translates ASCII into HTML-characters
    and - checks for broken links
    and - is not too expensive

    Until now I haven't found a better editor than FP.
    What's your alternative based on the requirements above?

    But if you think about making web pages seriously - get
    > some decent text editor and start learning HTML, XHTML and CSS.


    I think I make web pages seriously :) (With FP)

    Nico
     
    Nico Schuyt, Nov 29, 2003
    #12
  13. net

    Nico Schuyt Guest

    net wrote:
    > altamir wrote
    >> net wrote


    >>> you mean making the code with Frontpage was the error?


    >> That's what I mean. FP is the *worst* choice to make web pages. If
    >> you really have to use WYSIWYGs try something else, maybe Macromedia
    >> Dreamweaver? But if you think about making web pages seriously - get
    >> some decent text editor and start learning HTML, XHTML and CSS.


    > actually, I didn't design the site, someone else did but I was asked
    > to take a look and troubleshoot some problems with it. I decided in
    > the end that the code needed replacing completely, right from
    > scratch. Fortunately I use Dreamweaver and it all had a happy
    > ending...


    There's *no* relation between an editor and the quality of coding.
    Compare it to a camera. An expert can make professional pictures with a
    camera of $10. An amateur with a Nikon D1X will still not be able to produce
    good quality.

    Nico
     
    Nico Schuyt, Nov 29, 2003
    #13
  14. Quoth the raven named rf:

    > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <> wrote in message
    > news:lCQxb.118288$...
    >
    >>Quoth the raven named altamir:
    >>
    >>
    >>>That's what I mean. FP is the *worst* choice to make web pages.

    >>
    >>May I introduce you to Microsoft Word? :)

    >
    > Piffle. Use a real HTML editor: Microsoft Excel :)
    >
    > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rf/excel.html
    >
    > Be sure to view source:
    >
    > view-source:http://users.bigpond.net.au/rf/excel.html


    Yuck. Tho I think it's a tossup.

    This is not my site:
    http://home.att.net/~karinschoolofdance/

    --
    -bts
    -This space intentionally left blank.
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Nov 29, 2003
    #14
  15. Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
    > Quoth the raven named altamir:
    >
    >> That's what I mean. FP is the *worst* choice to make web pages.

    >
    > May I introduce you to Microsoft Word? :)


    May I introduce *you* to Microsoft Publisher? :cool:

    --
    Joel.
     
    Joel Shepherd, Nov 29, 2003
    #15
  16. Quoth the raven named Joel Shepherd:

    > Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
    >
    >> Quoth the raven named altamir:
    >>
    >>> That's what I mean. FP is the *worst* choice to make web pages.

    >>
    >> May I introduce you to Microsoft Word? :)

    >
    > May I introduce *you* to Microsoft Publisher? :cool:


    No, you may not. <g>

    Yeah, I know it's just as bad as Word. For giggles, I turned on my old
    Pub 97 and generated a page or two. That version wasn't quite as bad
    as Word...

    --
    -bts
    -This space intentionally left blank.
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Nov 29, 2003
    #16
  17. Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
    > I turned on my old Pub 97 and generated a page or two. That version
    > wasn't quite as bad as Word...


    Publisher may have gone downhill since. Any pages I've seen generated
    by it have basically been one big JPEG.

    Of course, in terms of signal-to-noise that still might be an
    improvement over Word.

    --
    Joel.
     
    Joel Shepherd, Nov 29, 2003
    #17
  18. net

    altamir Guest

    "Nico Schuyt" <> wrote in
    news:3fc8095b$0$175$:

    > My requirements for the perfect editor are:
    > - a good stylesheet editor
    > and - allows editing in wysiwyg
    > and - enables applying styles from (multiple) internal- or external
    > stylesheets
    > and - has good support of PHP
    > and - built in validator
    > and - built in spell checker
    > and - format selected paragraphs into a list and the other way around
    > and - paste text from applications like Word as plain paragraps
    > and - add width and height properties to an imported image and change
    > them on refresh when the source image has changed
    > and - translates ASCII into HTML-characters
    > and - checks for broken links
    > and - is not too expensive
    >
    > Until now I haven't found a better editor than FP.
    > What's your alternative based on the requirements above?


    My skills + text editor + server-side scripting + online services.

    > I think I make web pages seriously :) (With FP)


    Ok, but I don't consider FP as a serious WYSIWYG tool. It's rather
    amateurish.

    --
    altamir
     
    altamir, Nov 29, 2003
    #18
  19. net

    altamir Guest

    "net" <> wrote in news:3fc7dc37@212.67.96.135:

    > actually, I didn't design the site, someone else did but I was asked
    > to take a look and troubleshoot some problems with it. I decided in
    > the end that the code needed replacing completely, right from scratch.
    > Fortunately I use Dreamweaver and it all had a happy ending...


    I would do the same. There's nothing worse than maintaing someone else's
    badly written code.

    --
    altamir
     
    altamir, Nov 29, 2003
    #19
  20. net

    Nico Schuyt Guest

    altamir wrote:
    > Nico Schuyt wrote


    >> My requirements for the perfect editor are:
    >> <snip>
    >> What's your alternative based on the requirements above?


    > My skills + text editor + server-side scripting + online services.


    Sounds great! Where can i download a trial version?
    Nico
     
    Nico Schuyt, Nov 29, 2003
    #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. joon
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    516
    Roedy Green
    Jul 8, 2003
  2. Joshua
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    6,056
    Joshua
    Sep 29, 2004
  3. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    361
  4. Dan

    correct or not correct?

    Dan, Oct 2, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    445
  5. tg
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,561
    Travis Newbury
    May 9, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page