About NOSCRIPT positionning

[natric]

[This followup was posted to alt.comp.lang.javascript and a copy was sent to the cited author.]

I'm trying to position a noscript warning using html table tag (this to
be sure it's well visible from within the rest of the page which is
build through css style positionning capabilities), but encounter some
problem from browser to browser. When right under IE6, wrong under NN7,
Mozilla and Opera. How to do ?

Better than any comment, I've made a test page. Feel free to take a look
at
<http://natricity.free.fr/thread_about_noscript_position/noscript_positi
on.html>.

Do you have an idea ?
Soon

Eric

 

[Steve Pugh]

[This followup was posted to alt.comp.lang.javascript and a copy was sent to the cited author.]

Was your message a followup to another post? If so I didn't see it,
and there was no References header.
And you've screwed your Followup-To header. (Followup-To:
http://natricity.free.fr/thread_about_noscript_position/noscript_position.html)
(My server has also never heard of alt.comp.lang.javascript and
neither has Google, does it exist? or did you mean
comp.lang.javascript?)

I'm trying to position a noscript warning using html table tag (this to
be sure it's well visible from within the rest of the page which is
build through css style positionning capabilities), but encounter some
problem from browser to browser. When right under IE6, wrong under NN7,
Mozilla and Opera. How to do ?

You have an sbsolutely positioned div containing a table that contains
a document.write; and then after the div you have another table that
contains a noscript element.

It is pure fluke that the document.write and the noscript place their
content in the same place in any browser. You're mixing CSS absolute
positioning and HTML layout tables (spit) and expecting them to line
up across browsers. Not a chance.

Better than any comment, I've made a test page. Feel free to take a look
at
<http://natricity.free.fr/thread_about_noscript_position/noscript_positi
on.html>.

Put the noscript element immediately after the script element and use
CSS to suggest the presentation you want.

Something like: http://steve.pugh.net/test/natric.html

Followups narrowed to alt.html.

Steve

 

[natric]

[This followup was posted to alt.html and a copy was sent to the cited
author.]

[This followup was posted to alt.comp.lang.javascript and a copy was sent to the cited author.]

Was your message a followup to another post? If so I didn't see it,
and there was no References header.
And you've screwed your Followup-To header. (Followup-To:
http://natricity.free.fr/thread_about_noscript_position/noscript_position.html)

Effectively, this is not a real follow-up, but I did-it just to be able
to cross post from Gravity.

(My server has also never heard of alt.comp.lang.javascript and
neither has Google, does it exist? or did you mean
comp.lang.javascript?)

No no, it exist and is reachable from news.free.fr

You have an sbsolutely positioned div containing a table that contains
a document.write; and then after the div you have another table that
contains a noscript element.

It is pure fluke that the document.write and the noscript place their
content in the same place in any browser. You're mixing CSS absolute
positioning and HTML layout tables (spit) and expecting them to line
up across browsers. Not a chance.

Well, I agree, but then how do you show the noscript warning when the
rest of the page is css oriented ; I mean the noscript has not any
chance to be visible just because masked by others elements with a
higher z-index. By design, doesn't a noscript tag content should be pure
html (i.e. without any style) ?

Put the noscript element immediately after the script element and use
CSS to suggest the presentation you want.

Something like: http://steve.pugh.net/test/natric.html

Effectively, I didn't figured this going through this way (stupid guy ;
isn't it ) It's so easy to write it down at place I want it in the
browser interpreting flow... Arghh, I have to say : thanks Steve !

Followups narrowed to alt.html.

Steve

 

[Toby A Inkster]

By design, doesn't a noscript tag content should be pure
html (i.e. without any style) ?

You can style the contents of a NOSCRIPT element. You can even style the
element itself. And why wouldn't you? Scripting is not a prerequisite for
CSS.

 

[natric]

[This followup was posted to alt.html and a copy was sent to the cited
author.]

You can style the contents of a NOSCRIPT element. You can even style the
element itself. And why wouldn't you? Scripting is not a prerequisite for
CSS.

Well, understood... But a subsidiary question : doesn't it exist any
browser which could supports scripting and not CSS ? What happen if user
disable javascript in this kind of browser (if it exists) ? What's the
chance the noscript warning be well visible in the garbage ?

However, thanks.

 

[kchayka]

doesn't it exist any
browser which could supports scripting and not CSS ?

Links

Or at least some variations of it do have JS support, like
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~clock/twibright/links/features.html
It is still a text browser, though, and doesn't have any CSS support
that I'm aware of.

 

[Toby A Inkster]

Links

And Netscape 2 and 3.

 

[GD]

And Netscape 2 and 3.

How about Opera? Didn't that have Javascript 1.0 support prior
to version 3.5?

 

[Toby A Inkster]

How about Opera? Didn't that have Javascript 1.0 support prior
to version 3.5?

Correct -- Javascript was added for 3.0, with CSS not until 3.5 (although
CSS didn't get good until 3.6)

Nice historic Opera reference here:
http://people.opera.com/rijk/opera/img/opera-size-1.png