includes

[Helpful person]

Re: includes

On Sep 6, 1:04 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<a.nony.m...@ex ample.invalidwr ote:

Helpful person wrote:

(By the way, I reference my website not because I am proud of its
structure but becaue the links help my ranking with the search
engines.)

>
<lol I'd fix it first...
>
<http://validator.w3.or g/check?verbose=1 &uri=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.richardf ...>
>
Did you see the screenshot I posted in one of your threads several
months ago?http://k75s.home.att.net/show/richardfisher.jpg
>
--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

Which browser are you using? I see no problems on my Windows XP
machine running the latest IE, Mozilla and netscape Browsers.

https://www.richardfisher.com

[Rik Wasmus]

Re: includes

On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 22:27:08 +0200, Helpful person <rrllff@yahoo.c om
wrote:

On Sep 6, 1:04 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<a.nony.m...@ex ample.invalidwr ote:

>Helpful person wrote:

(By the way, I reference my website not because I am proud of its
structure but becaue the links help my ranking with the search
engines.)

>>
><lol I'd fix it first...
>>
><http://validator.w3.or g/check?verbose=1 &uri=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.richardf ...>
>>
>Did you see the screenshot I posted in one of your threads several
>months ago?http://k75s.home.att.net/show/richardfisher.jpg
>>
>--
> -bts
> -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

>
Which browser are you using? I see no problems on my Windows XP
machine running the latest IE, Mozilla and netscape Browsers.

The only browser I DON'T have any problems with it are Opera 9 & MSIE7,
because they decided to scale all HTML elements up or down with a
font-resize. MSIE 6, Netscape, Firefox, they all have a screwed up site on
a bigger font-size.

--
Rik Wasmus

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Re: includes

Helpful person wrote:

"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:

>Helpful person wrote:

>>(By the way, I reference my website not because I am proud of its
>>structure but becaue the links help my ranking with the search
>>engines.)

>>
><lol I'd fix it first...
>>
><http://validator.w3.or g/check?verbose=1 &uri=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.richardf ...>
>>
>Did you see the screenshot I posted in one of your threads several
>months ago?
>http://k75s.home.att.net/show/richardfisher.jpg

>
Which browser are you using? I see no problems on my Windows XP
machine running the latest IE, Mozilla and netscape Browsers.

Firefox. Press Control-Plus a couple of times.

See this, too: http://k75s.home.att.net/fontsize.html

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

[David E. Ross]

Re: includes

On 9/6/2007 1:27 PM, Helpful person wrote:

On Sep 6, 1:04 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<a.nony.m...@ex ample.invalidwr ote:

>Helpful person wrote:

>>(By the way, I reference my website not because I am proud of its
>>structure but becaue the links help my ranking with the search
>>engines.)

><lol I'd fix it first...
>>
><http://validator.w3.or g/check?verbose=1 &uri=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.richardf ...>
>>
>Did you see the screenshot I posted in one of your threads several
>months ago?http://k75s.home.att.net/show/richardfisher.jpg
>>
>--
> -bts
> -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

>
Which browser are you using? I see no problems on my Windows XP
machine running the latest IE, Mozilla and netscape Browsers.
>

https://www.richardfisher.com

>

I'm using SeaMonkey 1.1.4, which has the same HTML rendering engine
(gecko 1.8.1.x) as Firefox 2. Thus, what I see should be the same as
seen with Firefox 2.

What I do see is the word "Consultant s" in the header "Richard Fisher
Engineering Consultants" overlaying the words "Profession al Services".
I also see three gray sidebars on the right but only if I scroll
horizontally (a major annoyance). I also see blue and green text on a
pale blue background; while I have no trouble with this, I'm not sure a
color-blind person can read it.

The W3C validator at <http://validator.w3.or g/says there are 18 HTML
errors. They might not be significant. However, this means that how
your page is viewed on different browsers is unpredictable. (Garbage in
= garbage out.)

--

David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>.

Anyone who thinks government owns a monopoly on inefficient, obstructive
bureaucracy has obviously never worked for a large corporation. © 1997

[Helpful person]

Re: includes

On Sep 6, 1:04 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<a.nony.m...@ex ample.invalidwr ote:

>
<lol I'd fix it first...
>
<http://validator.w3.or g/check?verbose=1 &uri=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.richardf ...>
>
Did you see the screenshot I posted in one of your threads several
months ago?http://k75s.home.att.net/show/richardfisher.jpg
>
--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

Thanks ever so much for showing me the screenshot. I had never tested
the display with Mozilla or Netscape with increased character size.
It is now fixed.

As far as validating the web site, it's just about impossible with
FrontPage. That is one of the reasons I'm rewriting in HTML.

https://www.richardfisher.com

[Pavel Lepin]

Re: includes


Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbr yce.comwrote in
<lKidnR_uZLEktH 3bnZ2dnUVZ_jydn Z2d@comcast.com >:

Helpful person wrote:

>Yes. However, I see no reason not to write strict XHTML
>(especially as I am starting from scratch) as this will
>probably (eventually) be the standard to replace HTML.

>
XHTML was an unfortunate deviation from HTML and is now a
dead end.

I don't feel 'unfortunate deviation' is a proper
characterisatio n (matter of taste to an extent, of
course). 'Excellent idea killed off by vendor indifference'
sounds more like it to me.

I was one of the many who jumped on the XHTML bandwagon,
and now I am developing in HTML 4.01 Strict.

Actually, XHTML 1.0 has its uses. You cannot serve it to
end-user in www context, of course, but it can be highly
useful as a backend or intermediate representation of your
markup.

--
This chickenus crossed the roadus while yodelingus.

[John Hosking]

Re: includes

Helpful person wrote:

>
Thanks ever so much for showing me the screenshot. I had never tested
the display with Mozilla or Netscape with increased character size.
It is now fixed.

Maybe at your house it is, but it's not on the Web.
Modified: Thursday, June 28, 2007 5:34:18 PM

>
As far as validating the web site, it's just about impossible with
FrontPage.

Not really, but it helps to watch what you ask FP to do for you. The
last version I had (FP2002?) wasn't very CSS-aware, so it wanted to add
a bunch of deprecated attributes to my layout tables...

That is one of the reasons I'm rewriting in HTML.

It's a pity you don't have an editor to do that with. ;-)

>
http://www.richardfisher.com

--
John
Pondering the value of the UIP: http://improve-usenet.org/

[Bergamot]

Re: includes

Rik Wasmus wrote:

>
The only browser I DON'T have any problems with it are Opera 9 & MSIE7,
because they decided to scale all HTML elements up or down with a
font-resize.

Opera has always done *page* zoom, not text zoom. IE7 does both, but you
are apparently just using its page zoom.

MSIE 6, Netscape, Firefox, they all have a screwed up site on
a bigger font-size.

That is not a problem with the browser. It means your design is broken.

--
Berg