|
|
Posted by Nikita the Spider on 08/23/07 02:54
In article
<doraymeRidThis-AA507A.10333023082007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>,
dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> In article
> <NikitaTheSpider-6E16D0.18161822082007@news-server.nc.rr.com>,
> Nikita the Spider <NikitaTheSpider@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > - FF 1.5 seems to have trouble navigating to the exact row; the trouble
> > goes away if I add this:
> > table, td,th,tr { border-collapse: collapse; }
> Thanks so much for this info. I have FF 2 and it seemed fine in
> that, I did not suspect about earlier builds.
Ooops, I retract my statement. I see I was just getting confused by the
fact that the page isn't very tall, so except for the top 2 or 3 ids, FF
can't scroll the page far enough to reach the other ids. (On my laptop,
anyway.) Making my font size huge makes the page taller and shows me
that FF 1.5 does indeed scroll to the correct point in the page. My
mistake.
> When you moved the id to td, I assume it was fine for all the
> other browsers too.
I only tested it in Safari. Testing it in the other browsers is your
job. =)
> There seems to be a bit of an instability in all of this, no?
> Souns like it is a complicated business for a browser to find a
> unique id. Wonder if all this works better without a table at
> all to confuse with rows and borders? Also if the older fashioned
> name="" instead of or in addition to the id="" might help? Need
> to get this business reasonably right.
Try it! I don't see any reason why Safari should fail to respect an id
on a TR. Perhaps there's a good reason backed up by a spec, perhaps it's
a bug.
> There is another little issue, an important one for me, don't
> know if you know stuff about this, when you open a browser,
> fresh, and you type or paste or insert a bookmark with the base
> address with #alpha_numeric, some browsers are happy and go to
> the right place immediately while others do not (I know Mac IE
> does not, it just ignores the appended bit but still gets the
> page. And behaves itself in negotiating the internal links!) not
> that this is important).
You say, "some browsers are happy..." Care to narrow down the
definition of "some browsers"? That seems important. And I don't think
anyone will complain about you not supporting IE/Mac, unless you have an
unusual client base.
> [btw. A very simple rock steady alternative for the job this is
> destined for would have been, instead of a table of 100 rows, 100
> simple html pages, each with the info that was in each row (and
> perhaps a php included index to all the pages on each page! In
> fact, the job would have been finished by me already. The things
> we do for a bit of elegance! Perhaps I will persist a while
> longer though. At least it is instructive and somewhat
> interesting.]
Elegance is its own reward.
--
Philip
http://NikitaTheSpider.com/
Whole-site HTML validation, link checking and more
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|