W
S
Steve Pugh
Webcastmaker said:
What do you mean by 'right'?
Right in this case would be to not show the Flash movie at all as the
<object> is using the bogus MS syntax and <embed> is non-standard.
But NN7 did[1] show the movie and considering the nature of the OP's
error that could only mean that it was using the <embed>.
[1] I say did as NN7 no longer shows the movie because the OP has
managed to reverse his earlier error. The <object> is now correct
(well, correct in MSIE terms) but the <embed> is now looking for a
movie that isn't there.
Steve
S
Steve Pugh
rf said:
Actually you did say:
<runs off to check spec>
But that leads to the nitpick about the HTML spec not being a
standard. ;-)
But I was merely alluding to the fact that of the two pieces of code
being used neither were standards compliant - the <object> used the MS
code and the <embed> isn't part of any HTML spec to start with.
Steve
C
Chris
It was more like, "OMG thief!!!111 We don't associate with riff raff new get
out"
out"
C
Chris
Karl is not a meanie, he's a sweetie.
Besides, you sound like my four year old: "but he did it first!"
Stop defending the evil karl.
C
Chris
But he did it to me first! :'( Oh god, I sound like your 4 year old again,
I just can't help it. MUMMY!
R
rf
ROFLMBAO.
Oh, the irony.
An almost record thread and the OP still has no idea.
Re my comment up there ^: IE now gets it right and (rightly I guess) Mozilla
barfs.
Hint to OP:
http://validator.w3.org (or did I say that before?) Then again, will this
help in this situation?
R
rf
Steve Pugh said:
I thought that was what you were alluding to.
I habitually use two sources of information: the spec and MSDN. The former
is usefull when one wants to know what a browser should do and is usefull
(sort of) in the real world. The latter is usefull when one wants to know
what IE does. (much of my work involves driving MSHTML.DLL so MSDN is
appropriate).
Neither are standards. Neither are complete. They are both self and cross
contradictory.
Er, yes. It is a recomendation. Rather more to the point it is an historical
summary of what the browsers actually *do* do along with recomendations as
to what everybody thinks they *should* do. In my reading anyway
Er, OK. Let's introduce some "standards". Then we can break them
S
Steve Pugh
rf said:
I don't think so, but I did. ;-)
Nope. The error is effectively the same as a broken link and hence
nothing to do with the validator.
The validator will complain about the <embed> element of course, but
removing that won't help unless the OP also changes his <object>
element to something more standard.
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/
and
http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1081798064&count=1
are two different ways of feeding standards compliant <object>s to
decent browsers and MS compliant <object>s to MSIE. Only browsers that
don't understand either <object> syntax (for example Netscape 4 and
lower which only understand <embed>) miss out.
Steve
K
Karl Groves
Your site's content is built using material that other people have created.
You've done so completely without permission.
You're a thief.
-Karl
W
Webcastmaker
This is only a solution if you own Flash and can make movies. If you
just use other people's Flash it is not a solution. (actually not a
solution at all, but a work around)
Using <embed>, thought not "technically" correct, produced the
desired effects, and is likely to continue to work for several years,
and several more versions of browsers.
K
Karl Groves
Chris said:
It will also make the rest of the group continue with their killkiling you
and ignoring your insipid pleas for help.
-Karl
K
Karl Groves
Chris said:
S
Steve Pugh
Webcastmaker said:
The only part where you would need to make your only movie would be if
you wanted to use the 'satay' part of the technique to stream the
movie in IE. If you just wanted the movie to download and play then
stopping one stage earlier (at the section headed "Making Progress" in
the article) is sufficient.
Or there's the second technique I linked to which uses conditional
comments to give IE a MS flavoured <object> (thus allowing streaming
in IE) and other browsers a standard <object>. However, some people
regard conditional comments as no better than JavaScript browser
sniffing and won't use them for that reason.
Swings and roundabouts, six of one and half a dozen of the other,
horses for courses, etc., etc.
True, but as I said only NN4 and similar antiques needs <embed>. All
modern-ish browser support one or the other types of <object>. At
least for Flash. For some other media the results are different.
Steve
W
Webcastmaker
Which is the desired effect in 90% of the applications. I have not
tried it (I use embed), but I believe with out doing the satay
method, pre loaders would be ineffective.
Oh the joys of the web....
N
Neal
Chris, stop beinmg a **** and have a little understanding of why this ng
works. We do ask for a degree of conformance. It helps conversation flow
easier, enables everyone to work a little less hard on this ng thing.
We're busy people, not your tech support team. You do it the way we're
accustomed to, you get help sooner. You don't, well, **** ya. That's how
it works.
N
Neal
"What a strange person!"
(drops giant wooden rabbit on him with a loud *plonk*)
N
Neal
Don't tell me that's what the future holds... :-\
E
Els
Neal said:
<g>
B
Bill Clark
rf said:
He'll be home late...