Why can I not see the output with MY IE9?

D

Doug Miller

www.mroldies.net/test3.html
Click to expand...

Gosh, I wonder if it might have anything to do with invalid html...

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en" dir="ltr">
<html><head>

Will you *ever* learn to validate your pages?
This is driving me nuts.
Click to expand...

Driving you nuts is a short trip.
On top of how I am already.
All I see is a framebox and a place holder thing.
At the longtailvideo.com website, I see their players just fine.
What do I need to change on my settings so I can see the player?
Click to expand...

Write valid html, maybe?
FF9 and Opera shows the player just fine.
Click to expand...

BTW, this isn't helping:

<script type='text/javascript'>
 
R

richard

Gosh, I wonder if it might have anything to do with invalid html...

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en" dir="ltr">
<html><head>

Will you *ever* learn to validate your pages?


Driving you nuts is a short trip.


Write valid html, maybe?


BTW, this isn't helping:

<script type='text/javascript'>
Click to expand...

Heh, the validator said it was required.
Page validates now don't it smart boy?
 
D

Doug Miller

Heh, the validator said it was required.
Click to expand...

Compare these lines

<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js">
<script type="text/javascript">

to this one

<script type='text/javascript'>

and see if you can figure out what's wrong.
 
R

richard

Compare these lines

<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js">
<script type="text/javascript">

to this one

<script type='text/javascript'>

and see if you can figure out what's wrong.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with that code. Asswipe.

<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript"> jwplayer.key"edited";</script>

That's what you left out.
 
D

Denis McMahon

Heh, the validator said it was required.
Page validates now don't it smart boy?
Click to expand...

Observation:

If you wrapped the jwplayer setup call in a function, and called the
function in the onload handler of the body element, then you could put
the jwplayer setup bit of the script in the document head, which is a lot
neater than having script elements in document bodies.

ie:

change this:

<body>

to this:

<body onload="setupVideoPlayer();">

and this:

jwplayer( "my-video" ).setup({ <-----many lines of data-----> });

to this:

function videoPlayerSetup() {
jwplayer( "my-video" ).setup({ <-----many lines of data-----> });
}

and then put all of this:

function videoPlayerSetup() {
jwplayer( "my-video" ).setup({ <-----many lines of data-----> });
}

after the line:

jwplayer.key= <-----some data here-----> ;

so that it is inside the same script element,

and then delete the script element from after the </div> in the document
body.

Finally, you ought to just double check whether the jwplayer setup()
method requires json style data which, unlike normal javascript strings,
specifies only double quotes i.e. "" as string delimiters.

Not that I expect you to pay any attention to any of this, as doing so
would break with almost 20 years of well established tradition.
 
D

Doug Miller

There is nothing wrong with that code. Asswipe.

<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript"> jwplayer.key"edited";</script>

That's what you left out.
Click to expand...

You missed the point rather badly, I'm afraid. But I should have expected that.
 
L

Lewis

In message said:
40tude.net:

Gosh, I wonder if it might have anything to do with invalid html...
Click to expand...
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en" dir="ltr">
<html><head>
Click to expand...
Will you *ever* learn to validate your pages?
Click to expand...

Nope, it's Richard. He hasn't learned anything in the last 10-15 years,
least of all to validate. All attempts to help him will be met with
argument. Really, it's pointless replying to him, it's exactly like
arguing science with a fundamentalist.
 
R

richard

You missed the point rather badly, I'm afraid. But I should have expected that.
Click to expand...

are you implying then that "src" is required?
hardly.
other than that, I still see nothing wrong.
kindly explain your point.
 
R

richard

Nope, it's Richard. He hasn't learned anything in the last 10-15 years,
least of all to validate. All attempts to help him will be met with
argument. Really, it's pointless replying to him, it's exactly like
arguing science with a fundamentalist.
Click to expand...

Right. Like then my page should not validate, ever.
Which it does.
The problem I am having with MY IE 9 is purely local.
While others who have seen the page see what I wrote with no problems.
One person said it worked fine on IE 8, 9 and 10 even.

Luckily, there are forums where this bullshit harassment does not take
place.
Yes I have learned a lot in the past 10 years.

But we all know, that YOU never had any problems writing code.
You just whipped it out with never once consulting anything.
Or making any mistakes doing it.

Do you know the story behind Napster?
The claim is, it was the guy's very first program.
I call it bullshit.
Nobody ever wrote such an intense program on their first try.
Ever!
 
L

Lewis

Right. Like then my page should not validate, ever.
Which it does.
Click to expand...

Which it didn't.
The problem I am having with MY IE 9 is purely local.
While others who have seen the page see what I wrote with no problems.
One person said it worked fine on IE 8, 9 and 10 even.
Click to expand...
Luckily, there are forums where this bullshit harassment does not take
place.
Yes I have learned a lot in the past 10 years.
Click to expand...

Evidence to the contrary. You are writing XHMTL, for example.
But we all know, that YOU never had any problems writing code.
Click to expand...

We do?

The difference between us, richard, is not that I am perfect and you are
not, the difference is that you are an asshole who refuses to learn
anything new and who makes a habit or arguing with people trying to help
you or worse, calls them names. All things you have done numerous times.
You also have a habit of posting the same exact issue over and over,
proving that you've refused to cahnge your code or listen to anything
anyone has done. In short, you are a time sink, as all efforts to help
you by those unfamiliar with your behavior are simply a waste.

I may be an asshole, bt I don't waste other's time about it.
 
D

Doug Miller

40tude.net:

Compare these lines

<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js">
<script type="text/javascript">

to this one

<script type='text/javascript'>

Do you see *anything* different?

And NO, I'm NOT going to tell you what it is. You *need* to learn to read what you've written
more carefully. This will be good practice for you.
 
R

richard

40tude.net:

Compare these lines

<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js">
<script type="text/javascript">

to this one

<script type='text/javascript'>

Do you see *anything* different?

And NO, I'm NOT going to tell you what it is. You *need* to learn to read what you've written
more carefully. This will be good practice for you.
Click to expand...

and again, I am calling you a fucking jackass who just loves to take a
little item and play stupid mind games with it.
There is nothing wrong with the code.
 
D

Doug Miller

and again, I am calling you a fucking jackass who just loves to take a
little item and play stupid mind games with it.
Click to expand...

See, this is one reason you get called "Richard the Stoopid", and one reason you deserve it:
you just don't understand that abusing people is -- to put it mildly -- not the best route to
persuading them to help you, now or in the future.
 
R

richard

I think all the rest of us agree with that.


No, it isn't. test3.html is still only a blank, empty page, exactly like
your screen9.jpg demonstrates. <woot!>

(FF9 is seriously out of date.)
Click to expand...

strange. that page does not seem to exist.
 
B

Ben Bacarisse

Doug Miller said:
40tude.net:

Compare these lines

<script type="text/javascript" src="jwplayer/jwplayer.js">
<script type="text/javascript">

to this one

<script type='text/javascript'>

Do you see *anything* different?

And NO, I'm NOT going to tell you what it is. You *need* to learn to
read what you've written more carefully. This will be good practice
for you.
Click to expand...

I've looked, and while I think I've seen the differences, I don't know
what point you are making. Can you help me out?
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

Ben said:
I've looked, and while I think I've seen the differences, I don't know
what point you are making. Can you help me out?
Click to expand...


If you look at my post it will explain, SCRIPT element *requires* both
opening and closing tags.
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

I can NOT install Anaconda on my Windows laptop correctly 2
I need help fixing my website 2
Strange problem with BACK button IE9 0
How can I fix my pattern coding error in c++ 0
IE9 beta finally seems to support xhtml properly 2
Can someone explain why i have to drag my mouse on one window and the shape to be printed on another 1
Looking for feedback on this markup language I developed and my website idea? 0
Weird Behavior with Rays in C and OpenGL 4

Members online

Total: 28 (members: 1, guests: 27)
Robots: 355

Forum statistics

Threads
473,755
Messages
2,569,536
Members
45,014
Latest member
BiancaFix3

Latest Threads

Top