Rant: Microsoft madness

**Harris Kosmidhs** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

DuncanIdaho wrote:

Hello
>

Now I've always stood back when people dis' Microsoft and thought, "well
OK but it can't be that bad". Well actually it is. For gods sake, when
are these people going to GET A GRIP. IE7 is RUBBISH when it comes to
css, at least in my experience.
>
I have spent(wasted) more time trying to get the layout to work in IE
when it works perfectly in the other browsers (even in older versions of
those browsers) than I care to remember.
>

I used to spend such hours some time ago. When I learned (really
learned) CSS and html I stopped having such problems.

I found out that with writing html/css according to web standards and
validating the code my sites render well both on IE>=7, FF, opera,
safari. At least at the 95% of the them.

Harris

**Beauregard T. Shagnasty** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

DuncanIdaho wrote:

What a nightmare.

Perhaps you are attempting the non-attainable goal of "pixel precision"
pages. That never works. <g>

Post a URL to your page(s) and someone will have advice on what needs to
be fixed.

http://tekrider.net/pages/faq.php?q=flex

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows

**Andy Dingley** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

On 6 May, 13:45, DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho2. ..@googlemail.c omwrote:

IE7 is RUBBISH when it comes to css, at least in my experience.

It's merely "poor" on CSS, only "rubbish" if you ask it to work with
non-conformant HTML & CSS. Mostly it gets it wrong in the areas around
error correction. Code perfectly (which isn't _that_ hard) and you'll
avoid the majority of the problems. If you feed it only a broad subset
of CSS, omitting those few aspects that just don't work at all, then
you might even get its performance up to "good", or at least
"acceptable ".

A few years ago it was necessary to do bad and evil coding hacks to
get things to work at all. Things have improved since then - now we
can work just by being careful and avoiding a few problematic areas,
we don't have to actively abuse the code to get it to work.

Also forget about obsessions with, "Must look identical everywhere, on
every browser". That's a bad idea for starters.

rf · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho20 08@googlemail.c omwrote in news:V6-
dnYCgE6lrz73VRV nyggA@bt.com:

Hello
>
I wanted to use Cascading Stylesheets as widely as possible.
Firefox and Opera (almost invariably) render my style code in the same
way. Internet Explorer is ALWAYS the exception. Dissapearing <div>s non
appearing padding/margins, divs that don't expand when they are supposed
to or do expand when they are not supposed to ... I could go on but
there seems little point.

Let me guess: you are running the browsers in quirks mode, aren't you?

In quirks mode IE(any version) reproduces all the bugs that were in version
5.5 and before. Opera and FF don't reproduce as many IE bugs.

Don't want those bugs? Use standards mode.

--
Richard
Killing all google groups posts
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

**DuncanIdaho** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

rf wrote:

DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho20 08@googlemail.c omwrote in news:V6-
dnYCgE6lrz73VRV nyggA@bt.com:
>

>Hello
>>
>I wanted to use Cascading Stylesheets as widely as possible.
>Firefox and Opera (almost invariably) render my style code in the same
>way. Internet Explorer is ALWAYS the exception. Dissapearing <div>s non
>appearing padding/margins, divs that don't expand when they are supposed
>to or do expand when they are not supposed to ... I could go on but
>there seems little point.

>
Let me guess: you are running the browsers in quirks mode, aren't you?
>

Not sure what you mean by 'quirks mode'

I have this

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

Is that what you mean ?

Anyway, I'm not convinced by all this error handling stuff.

Case in point

I am applying a style to leaves in my navigation tree that is generated
on the fly by javascript via an AJAX call to a back end servlet.

I have two possible classes of hyperlink in my tree 'node' and 'leaf' I
have a default style that is applied to anything that isn't a leaf, if
it's a leaf I want to apply a different style.

in my stylesheet

a.leaf{
text-decoration: none;
color: rgb(254, 100, 253);
font-size: 0.75em;
}

I have the following in my javascript

textanchor.setA ttribute("class ", nodeType);

the result (in firebug) looks like this (fragment)

<span>
<a class="node" href="javascrip t:getMenuUpdate ('1')">Jeweller y</a>
</span>
<br/>
<span>
<a class="leaf" href="products? catagoryId=1:1" >Earrings</a>
</span>

This works perfectly in Firefox and Opera and any other non IE browser I
care to test it in, leaves are rendered in pink and nodes are rendered
in my default style(sky blue). In IE the browser ignores anything but
the default style... error handling, I don't think so.

I have tried all sorts of thing to get this to work to no avail. It just
doesn't work in IE ... just one example BTW, I have many others.

Go Figure

Idaho

**Blinky the Shark** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

DuncanIdaho wrote:

rf wrote:

>DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho20 08@googlemail.c omwrote in news:V6-
>dnYCgE6lrz73VRV nyggA@bt.com:
>>

>>Hello
>>>
>>I wanted to use Cascading Stylesheets as widely as possible.
>>Firefox and Opera (almost invariably) render my style code in the same
>>way. Internet Explorer is ALWAYS the exception. Dissapearing <div>s non
>>appearing padding/margins, divs that don't expand when they are supposed
>>to or do expand when they are not supposed to ... I could go on but
>>there seems little point.

>>
>Let me guess: you are running the browsers in quirks mode, aren't you?
>>

>
Not sure what you mean by 'quirks mode'

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/quirks-mode.html

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
NEW --Now evaluating a GG-free news feed: http://usenet4all.se

**DuncanIdaho** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

Blinky the Shark wrote:

DuncanIdaho wrote:
>

>rf wrote:

>>DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho20 08@googlemail.c omwrote in news:V6-
>>dnYCgE6lrz73VRV nyggA@bt.com:
>>>
>>>Hello
>>>>
>>>I wanted to use Cascading Stylesheets as widely as possible.
>>>Firefox and Opera (almost invariably) render my style code in the same
>>>way. Internet Explorer is ALWAYS the exception. Dissapearing <div>s non
>>>appearing padding/margins, divs that don't expand when they are supposed
>>>to or do expand when they are not supposed to ... I could go on but
>>>there seems little point.
>>Let me guess: you are running the browsers in quirks mode, aren't you?
>>>

>Not sure what you mean by 'quirks mode'

>

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/quirks-mode.html

>
>

Thanks for the link, interesting, OK, but this is not the issue then as
I have a doctype declaration right at the head of the doc.

Er well actually the document states

"Moreover, put the doctype declaration at the very start, since some
browsers go to Quirks Mode, if there is anything (even a comment) before
it... "

Well actually I have
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

So I removed it and tried and it doesn't seem to make any difference,
certainly not to the dynamic style application thing.

Hmmmm

Idaho

rf · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho20 08@googlemail.c omwrote in
news:DLednSzGep-e-7zVRVnyjgA@bt.c om:

rf wrote:

>DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho20 08@googlemail.c omwrote in news:V6-
>dnYCgE6lrz73VRV nyggA@bt.com:
>>

>>Hello
>>>
>>I wanted to use Cascading Stylesheets as widely as possible.
>>Firefox and Opera (almost invariably) render my style code in the
>>same way. Internet Explorer is ALWAYS the exception. Dissapearing
>><div>s non appearing padding/margins, divs that don't expand when
>>they are supposed to or do expand when they are not supposed to ...
>>I could go on but there seems little point.

>>
>Let me guess: you are running the browsers in quirks mode, aren't
>you?
>>

>
Not sure what you mean by 'quirks mode'

Then bloody google for it. You will find three hundred and seventy three
thousand references to it.

I have this
>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

The above line puts IE into quirks mode.

Anything at all, even a comment, before the doctype puts IE into quirks
mode.

This is one of the reasons you should not use XHTML, apart from the fact
that IE simply does not understand it, unless you serve it up as
text/html and rely on IE error correcting it correctly back to HTML.

<snip irrelevant stuff>

Run IE in standards mode and see if your other problems go away too.

--
Richard
Killing all google groups posts
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

rf · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho20 08@googlemail.c omwrote in
news:2MSdnT_6yq p89rzVnZ2dnUVZ8 qOknZ2d@bt.com:

Blinky the Shark wrote:

>DuncanIdaho wrote:
>>

>>Not sure what you mean by 'quirks mode'

>>
>http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/quirks-mode.html
>>
>>

>
Thanks for the link, interesting, OK, but this is not the issue then
as I have a doctype declaration right at the head of the doc.
>
Er well actually the document states
>
"Moreover, put the doctype declaration at the very start, since some
browsers go to Quirks Mode, if there is anything (even a comment)
before it... "
>
Well actually I have
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

Sorry, didn't read the whole thread before my prior reply.

It is now time for you provide a URL to this page that is giving your
problems.

--
Richard
Killing all google groups posts
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

**Beauregard T. Shagnasty** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

DuncanIdaho wrote:

Not sure what you mean by 'quirks mode'
>
I have this
>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
>
Is that what you mean ?

Have a look at this, please:

http://tekrider.net/html/doctype.php

Anyway, I'm not convinced by all this error handling stuff.

Please be convinced!

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows

**DuncanIdaho** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

rf wrote:

DuncanIdaho <Duncan.Idaho20 08@googlemail.c omwrote in
news:DLednSzGep-e-7zVRVnyjgA@bt.c om:
>

>>>

>Not sure what you mean by 'quirks mode'

>
Then bloody google for it. You will find three hundred and seventy three
thousand references to it.

Irrelevant, it was a passing comment.
And don't swear at me.

>

>I have this
>>
><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

>
The above line puts IE into quirks mode.
>
Anything at all, even a comment, before the doctype puts IE into quirks
mode.
>
This is one of the reasons you should not use XHTML,

snip annoying stuff

Really, well now I'm even more annoyed, I think I'll put a link on the
front page suggesting people download Opera or Firefox.

As for posting a URL, well I'm working on a company intranet behind a
firewall, the network boffins laughed when I suggested they open up so I
can post URLs, they are setting me up a nice isolated server so I can
post stuff here.

Idaho

**DuncanIdaho** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

DuncanIdaho wrote:
>

>Not sure what you mean by 'quirks mode'
>>
>I have this
>>
><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
>"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
>>
>Is that what you mean ?

>
Have a look at this, please:
http://tekrider.net/html/doctype.php

Been there, read that, tried everything.

>

>Anyway, I'm not convinced by all this error handling stuff.

>
Please be convinced!
>

Anyway, thanks to everyone for all the input, it wasn't really an
attempt to get someone else to fix my problems, I'm quite happy to try
and figure it out myself (with a little help from my friends). Can't say
I've changed my views in any way at the moment. Still, perhaps IE 8 will
be better.

Thanks again
Idaho

**Beauregard T. Shagnasty** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

DuncanIdaho wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

>DuncanIdaho wrote:

>><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
>>"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
>><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

>>
>Have a look at this, please:
>http://tekrider.net/html/doctype.php

>
Been there, read that, tried everything.

...including changing your page to HTML 4.01 Strict? Give it a try.

>>Anyway, I'm not convinced by all this error handling stuff.

>>
>Please be convinced!

>
.. Can't say I've changed my views in any way at the moment.

A little experimentation is always fun - and may prove useful in this
case.

Still, perhaps IE 8 will be better.

Hah. Don't count on it! (Oh, and lots of people are still using IE 6,
y'know.)

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows

**DuncanIdaho** · Jun 27 '08, 07:18 PM

Re: Rant: Microsoft madness

>

>Still, perhaps IE 8 will be better.

>
Hah. Don't count on it! (Oh, and lots of people are still using IE 6,
y'know.)
>

Er, yea, actually I'm ignoring that issue hoping it will go away :-|
I found a nice big soft pile of sand to bury my head in.

I looked at the site in IE 6 and frankly felt a little sick.
Ah well, it's all character forming stuff so they tell me.

Idaho

Rant: Microsoft madness

Rant: Microsoft madness

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment