Posted by Els on 07/24/06 09:00

TC wrote:

> Yes, good idea to validate first. I'll try that now. But I suspect that
> there is no point putting an example online - it will almost certainly
> *work* online :-)

I don't see why. Really, if the doctype is what makes the difference,
that proves it's not a misplaced image file or anything. So if it
works locally without doctype, and not with a doctype, the same will
be the case on the web.

>>> Adding or removing an IE6 "mark of the web" (MOTW) has no affect
>>> on this, one way or the other.
>>
>> What *is* a mark of the web?
>
> IE executes local files (C:/blah.test) under the security restrictions
> of the Local zone. In days gone by, the Local zone had *less*
> restrictions than the Internet zone. So local files were *more capable*
> than remote ones. Now days, the Local zone has *more* restrictions than
> the Internet zone, so local files are (by default) *less* capable than
> remote ones. This gves problems if you want to test your files locally
> - they'll have *less* capablity than when you put them on your server!
>
> The MOTW is a special HTML comment which, if included in an HTML file,
> says to IE: "execute this file under the security restrictions of the
> Internet zone, not the Local zone". This lets you test your files "as
> if" they were actually on the web. Despite what many people seem to
> think, the MOTW feature is not a security hole, of any descripton.

Never heard of it, and never had a problem with HTML files locally,
even if I open them as local files instead of serving them as
webpages. I suppose this only comes into play when using scripts and
stuff, not plain HTML and CSS.

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/

[Back to original message]