| Home | Register | FAQ | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
22-02-2008, 13:20
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Great Scott!!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 223
|
ie8.js
has anyone used this? any experiences? useful tool or cumbersome beast? http://code.google.com/p/ie7-js/ |
|
|
|
|
23-02-2008, 05:19
|
#4 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,187
|
Quote:
How about all the users IE6/7 users on locked work/public terminals with JavaScript turned off for security reasons? Id rather save my users having to download 13kb and do my job properly. It's not impossible to replicate an xhtml/css website to look pretty much identical on IE6, IE7, FF, Opera, Konqueror and Safari. I usually just have to end up using conditional comments for various tweaks for IE6, and rarely have to use them for IE7 as it is pretty good at rendering. The main problems people have is accidently chucking IE6 into quirks mode, the first line in your source code (and check the generated xhtml) should be the Doctype. Then so long as your xhtml and css validates, you usually don't get many bugs to work out in the conditional comments. |
|
|
|
|
23-02-2008, 09:53
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
Great Scott!!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 223
|
just validated my code AND using this javascript and ie6 still has no idea!! MyDinnerParty.co.uk -- you throw the party, we'll do the cooking!! |
|
|
|
23-02-2008, 10:49
|
#6 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,187
|
Quote:
What's this then? Code:
In FF2 when I hover the menu on the right it seems to make the horizontal scrollbar appear. |
|
|
|
|
23-02-2008, 11:51
|
#7 (permalink) | |
|
Great Scott!!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 223
|
Quote:
Both silly mistakes, but it still passed validation with w3c. |
|
|
|
|
23-02-2008, 11:56
|
#8 (permalink) | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Strizivojna / Zagreb // Croatia
Posts: 79
 |
Quote:
I also prefer not to use JS for any kind of browser compatibility issues and always try to write my code so it can be rendered equally in each browser. |
|
|
|
|
23-02-2008, 14:11
|
#9 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,187
|
Quote:
Strange how it passed, as surely src and alt are required? Install these addons on Firefox, I find them very useful: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/60 https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/249 |
|
|
|
|
23-02-2008, 14:27
|
#10 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,340
|
...but the HTML validator is built into Web Developer. Tools -> Validate Local HTML (if it's offline). Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
23-02-2008, 16:08
|
#11 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,187
|
Quote:
Yes, but to check if a page is valid using the HTML Validator addon, all you have to do is look at the status bar for the result, and then view source to be told where the errors are and suggests what you have done wrong. Fix the errors and refresh until there is a green tick. It works offline too, and is stricter than the W3C Validator as it uses 2 algorithms to check. The W3C Validator didn't find that empty IMG tag, but the HTML Validator did. Whereas using the W3C Validator means you have to be online, and check every single page on your site against their site. Just seems like too much effort which is why many websites only have a valid homepage and the rest fail on silly errors. |
|
|
|
 |
