Bruce Dubbs wrote:
From the current book:
Ah, I was looking at the current website (e.g.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/):
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd";>
That xml declaration shoves IE and Opera into quirks mode.
Additionally, the DTD claims this is an XHTML-1.1 doc but
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> I looked at the reference and disagree strongly. It is true that xhtml
>> transitional allows most of the quirks of html, but xhtml strict does
>> not.
>
>
> Yes, that's why I didn't make a proposal to revert back to HTML-4.01. I
> agree with th
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I looked at the reference and disagree strongly. It is true that xhtml
transitional allows most of the quirks of html, but xhtml strict does
not.
Yes, that's why I didn't make a proposal to revert back to HTML-4.01. I
agree with the author on one point though: We're curre
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Reading
> http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/no-xhtml.htm just recently was
> very enlightening! I'm not proposing we drop the use of XHTML just yet,
> especially considering the few reports we've had of broken rendering,
> but at least it's something to consider when
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> While it turned out to be CSS issues this time, I'm wouldn't be so sure
> about XHTML not causing us problems. Reading
> http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/no-xhtml.htm just recently was
> very enlightening! I'm not proposing we drop the use of XHTML just yet,
Ouch, M
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
I'm 99% certain it's not the XHTML tags.
While it turned out to be CSS issues this time, I'm wouldn't be so sure
about XHTML not causing us problems. Reading
http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/no-xhtml.htm just recently was
very enlightening! I'm not proposing we
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 09:25:10AM -0500, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Dan Nicholson wrote:
> >Well, this isn't what you asked for, but it looks fine on IE-6 and
> >Firefox-1.5. However, the main page ain't too wiki like right now.
> >http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/ is just a page that says
> >andu
Jeremy wrote:
> I think I have it fixed now. If you all could just verify it for me,
> please. Also, has anyone looked at this in Konqueror or
> Safari? Curious
> if it looks alright in those.
>
> --
> JH
Looks great in IE, Jeremy. :) Unfortunately, the box I'm on only has IE 6
(6.0.2900.2180.x
Dan Nicholson wrote:
Well, this isn't what you asked for, but it looks fine on IE-6 and
Firefox-1.5. However, the main page ain't too wiki like right now.
http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/ is just a page that says
anduin.linuxfromscratch.org with links to sources and ISOs. Intended?
You can
On 1/24/06, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think I have it fixed now. If you all could just verify it for me,
> please. Also, has anyone looked at this in Konqueror or Safari? Curious
> if it looks alright in those.
Well, this isn't what you asked for, but it looks fine on IE-6 a
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
I think I have it fixed now. If you all could just verify it for me,
please. Also, has anyone looked at this in Konqueror or Safari? Curious
if it looks alright in those.
Looks better now. :) Works here in IE and Firefox 1.5.0. Thanks.
Justin
--
http://linuxfromscr
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> I think I have it fixed now. If you all could just verify it for me,
> please. Also, has anyone looked at this in Konqueror or Safari? Curious
> if it looks alright in those.
Looks fine in Mozilla-1.7.12 and konqueror-3.5.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailm
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> OK, I see what is happening, but I don't know how to fix it. The page
> uses a lot of blocks and IE must be placing the 2nd block (banner)
> before it is determining the 1st block (topnav) dimenensions--or is
> ignoring all of topnav dimensions when placing (banner). The log
Joe Ciccone wrote:
> I can tell you that the problem is in main.css in the #logo section,
> but, I have no clue how to fix it, I know that when I changed position:
> relative; to position: static; it showed up properly, but then the
> positioning was off.
OK, I see what is happening, but I don't k
John Miller wrote:
> Okay, sorry for the noise, its just when I tried to save the page to
> my computer to fiddle with the coding, IE actually removed the
> closing /. Thought that might have been causing the problem.
Yes, and if there was a [meta http-equiv="content-type"
content="text/html; char
Joe Ciccone wrote:
> I can tell you that the problem is in main.css in the #logo section,
> but, I have no clue how to fix it, I know that when I changed position:
> relative; to position: static; it showed up properly, but then the
> positioning was off.
Thanks. I believe that's probably it. IE d
I can tell you that the problem is in main.css in the #logo section,
but, I have no clue how to fix it, I know that when I changed position:
relative; to position: static; it showed up properly, but then the
positioning was off.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://w
John Miller wrote:
> when I tried to save the page to my
> computer to fiddle with the coding, IE actually removed the closing /.
> Thought that might have been causing the problem.
Really? I know MS thinks their SW is smarter than you are, but this
seems to be going a bit far.
-- Bruce
--
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Yes, the self closing tag is part of the xhtml standard where *all* tags
must be closed. You can use or . The standard mentions
that you might want to put a closing space before the closing / as in
for *broken* browsers. Actually the broken broswers they refer
to are quit
Alan Lord wrote:
> John Miller wrote:
>
>> I noticed an extra forward slash in a few tags, could IE be having
>> problems with them?
>>
>> "> href="http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/";>> src="/lfs/chrome/site/lfs-logo.png" width="192" height="75" alt="Linux
>> From Scratch" />"
>>
>> at end of
John Miller wrote:
> I noticed an extra forward slash in a few tags, could IE be having
> problems with them?
>
> " href="http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/";> src="/lfs/chrome/site/lfs-logo.png" width="192" height="75" alt="Linux
> From Scratch" />"
>
> at end of the alt field, and in the hr
John Miller wrote:
I noticed an extra forward slash in a few tags, could IE be having
problems with them?
"href="http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/";>src="/lfs/chrome/site/lfs-logo.png" width="192" height="75" alt="Linux
From Scratch" />"
at end of the alt field, and in the hr tag
and s
I noticed an extra forward slash in a few tags, could IE be having
problems with them?
"href="http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/";>src="/lfs/chrome/site/lfs-logo.png" width="192" height="75" alt="Linux
From Scratch" />"
at end of the alt field, and in the hr tag
and several slashes at the
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> I wasn't going to comment on this as I respect Bruce's judgment
> too much (though I disagreed in a big way here). However, since
> I'm about the fourth person to comment that *we* think that this
> just isn't right and needs to be fixed, I don't feel so bad.
As I've alread
Sorry, I tried to stop this getting out with the attachment. Not
quick enough!
R.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:36:34 -0600
Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Ennis wrote these words on 01/24/06 00:23 CST:
>
> > This may well be the case, but many people will
> > view the site using this particular non-standard,
> > whether or not they are a target audience.
> > If it
Peter Ennis wrote these words on 01/24/06 00:23 CST:
> This may well be the case, but many people will
> view the site using this particular non-standard,
> whether or not they are a target audience.
> If it looks bad and is easy to fix but remains
> unfixed due to lack of "catering" then it does
>However, I personally do not want to cater to an
>application that is notorious for not following standards. IE
>users are not our target audience.
>
> -- Bruce
This may well be the case, but many people will
view the site using this particular non-standard,
whether or not they are a target aud
28 matches
Mail list logo
