Posted by bigdaddybs on 10/03/06 07:42

Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> On 2006-10-02, Dan wrote:
> > That page comes out as a horrendous mess in my browser (Mozilla
> > SeaMonkey), with pieces of the page overlapping others, and some of the
> > text going off the right edge of the screen so I can't read it (there's
> > no horizontal scroll bar).
>
> In my browser (FF 1.5.0.7) there is a scroll bar, but even with it
> moved all the way to the right, some of the text is still off the
> screen.
>
> I think he has provided more ammunition for the anti-FP forces.
>
> > While the HTML validates, the CSS gives some errors and warnings.

Uh... That had nothing to do with FrontPage. That has more to do with
my (mis)understanding of div widths. Therefore, it is in the CSS, and
has NOTHING to do with my use of FP! It DOES however, point to the fact
that I didn't really test well in FF (the only other browser I
currently have access to.) For that I apologize.

I currently use 100% on multiple divs, and, apparently, this works in
IE6 Quirks mode (I DO state I used transitional, and why.) However,
since it IS CSS, can anyone tell me which div (outer or inner or both)
should be defined differently and how? My full page div (container) is
defined as 100% wide, and a number of internal divs are defined at 100%
wide (because they are to take up the width allowed by the container.)
Obviously at least one of those is wrong... Instead of trying to come
up with why FP is bad (especially when it wasn't to blame for the
problem), I'm sure you have run up against this before, somewhere...
How 'bout a clue?

As for the "overlapping", it is the bottom of page linkbar. I noticed
that in FF, but hadn't looked after other changes. (Sorry.) I put the
linkbar and copyright in a page-bottom div. It's defined at 100%, too.
Why would the copyright stay where it belongs, and the linkbar not?

I'm VERY loathe to ask, because then someone, I'm sure, will complain
about my HTML or CSS, but, to fix the problem, I need answers.

And you can't expect me to believe that you, who are so standards
compliant, do NOT have to "fix" things to work in
non-standards-compliant browsers. If you are professional, which I
believe at least many of you are, you would HAVE to. That also means
you have copies of these other browsers around. So, if you were
interested in the article, rather than trying to find things wrong with
my HTML or CSS (I DID "buck the trend" of complaining about FP), you
COULD read it.

Oh... And the statement "While the HTML validates, the CSS gives some
errors and warnings.", is explained on each and every page (see the
bottom), where it states: "NOTE: All CSS validates except the "New
Window Buttons" - Their CSS includes some invalid code (ie: hacks)
and warnings for using transparent backgrounds when color foregrounds
defined." Those hacks are the ONLY things that don't validate in my CSS
(underscore hacks). I'm working on another idea for those
pseudo-buttons. As for the warnings about the background colors, can
you explain why anything but "transparent" would be needed? And why
it's necessary at all?

Thanks, in advance, for any HELP. Believe it or not, I really do
appreciate it.
BigDaddyBS

[Back to original message]