|
|
Posted by rf on 09/27/05 11:44
clive wrote:>
> talthen.z-serwera.o2@nospam.pl wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for your answers- they will make be better in a world of illogic
wc3
> > standars :]
>
> The standards themselves are not the problem, the problem is the way
> that they are then intepreted by the various makers of browsers.
Nope. The problem is that the browser manufacturers have seen fit (IE
notably) to introduce error correction in an endeavour to display at least
*something* when an author serves up invalid soup.
(If all browsers totally ignored anything that is invalid (instead of trying
to second guess the author) then we would not be having this discussion. The
OP's code would simply have not worked, period.)
Where the browsers support a part of the spec then (largely, IE buts
excepted) they do it correctly.
But, what is a browser to do with the OP's grossly invalid CSS:
position: absolute; left: 160 px; top: 100; height: 100%; width:2; ?
Well, IE assumes that the OP really meant width: 2px. Mozilla does not.
Mozilla correctly ignores the invalid CSS, as the specs state it should.
True, IE is not performing to spec here but, well, it's IE after all :-)
Same with left: 160 px. The spec clearly states that these sort of property
values can not have spaces in them. "160 px" is simply invalid. The value
*must* be 160px.
As to the OP's gripe, does he/she always drive on the same side of the road
as everybody else? You can bet on it, the OP's driving is to the relevant
authorities specifications, otherwise the OP would not be here.
(Over here a year or three ago some little old lady drove up the freeway on
the wrong side (2 lanes each , seperated by 20 metres of bush). She made it
about 10 Kilometres before...)
Cheers
Richard.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|