473,695 Members | 2,799 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Site Template - Any Internet Explorer XML Parser errors?

NOTE: PAST EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT MANY ON USENET FAIL TO READ
ARTICLES PROPERLY PRIOR TO ANSWERING. I AM LOOKING FOR VERY SPECIFIC
INFORMATION, THEREFORE PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THOROUGHLY BEFORE
RESPONDING; OR ASK QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY. I *WILL* APPRECIATE ANY
CONSTRUCTIVE REPLY.

Greetings!

I am in the process of creating a template for a site. The site will be
*true* XHTML 1.1. That is, it will validate as XHTML 1.1 on all pages,
it will make use of the UTF-8 character set, and it will (whenever
possible) be sent out with a mime-type of application/xhtml+xml. To
force standards-compliant mode in Internet Explorer, I am also making
use of the JavaScript IE7 compliance patch (http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/).

The problem that I am experiencing is with Internet Explorer. As anyone
with any serious Borg-like tendencies (i.e., the “pursuit of
perfection”) will tell you, Internet Explorer is incapable of handling
application/xhtml+xml; treating it instead as a downloadable file. There
is a workaround, however. XHTML pages *can* be treated as
application/xml in a pinch (it is not *dis*allowed, just discouraged;
unlike text/html which is disallowed for XHTML), and IE *does* recognize
this format. However, to prevent IE from either downloading it or
displaying the XML tree, one has to apply a very small XSLT transformation.

The problem that I have run across is that IE (with the version in
question depending on the machine) will throw an XML parsing error due
to the standard XHTML 1.1 DOCTYPE:

<output>
The XML page cannot be displayed
Cannot view XML input using XSL style sheet. Please correct the error
and then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parameter entity must be defined before it is used. Error processing
resource 'http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd...

%xhtml-prefw-redecl.mod;
-^
</output>

Now, on *my* machine, I have reworked the resulting output so that IE 6
and lower does not throw this error, despite being fed a normal DOCTYPE.
However, IE7 *does* have to be fed a *non-standard* DOCTYPE to avoid
throwing this error.

Since IE 6 and lower is being fed a normal XHTML 1.1 DOCTYPE, I would
like to know if this error appears on any other person’s machine,when
they are using a version of IE less than 7. If you get this error with
your version of IE, I would like to know the following:

• Your version of IE
• Your OS (32-bit/64-bit), including service packs
• Your version of MSXMLS installed
• And the error message, if it differs significantly from above

Any and all comments about the *design* would also be appreciated.

The template can be found at http://www.bannerswarm.net/template.php

Please also note that the template is still under construction. While
the DOCTYPE in question will not change, the content and layout may
change suddenly and without warning.

TIA
...Geshel
--
*************** *************** *************** *************** *********
My return e-mail address is an automatically monitored spam honeypot.
Do not send e-mail there unless you wish to be reported as a spammer.
Please send all e-mail to my first name at my last name dot org, with
a subject-line of “NEWSGROUP REPLY FOR NEO GESHEL” (all uppercase).
*************** *************** *************** *************** *********
Apr 20 '07 #1
28 3587
Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
NOTE: PAST EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT MANY ON USENET FAIL TO READ
ARTICLES PROPERLY PRIOR TO ANSWERING. I AM LOOKING FOR VERY SPECIFIC
INFORMATION, THEREFORE PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THOROUGHLY BEFORE
RESPONDING; OR ASK QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY. I *WILL* APPRECIATE ANY
CONSTRUCTIVE REPLY.
You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to post it
that way.

Do you seriously expect constructive replies after that?

My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
Problem solved.

Or, if you insist on using XHTML in spite of its many well-known problems,
don't come back here asking for solutions to the problems you've insisted
on creating for yourself, and insulting the very people who tried to tell
you how to avoid those problems in the first place.

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Apr 20 '07 #2
Sherm Pendley wrote:
Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
>NOTE: PAST EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT MANY ON USENET FAIL TO READ
ARTICLES PROPERLY PRIOR TO ANSWERING. I AM LOOKING FOR VERY SPECIFIC
INFORMATION, THEREFORE PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THOROUGHLY BEFORE
RESPONDING; OR ASK QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY. I *WILL* APPRECIATE ANY
CONSTRUCTIVE REPLY.
You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to post it
that way.
Would you rather I multi-post? Having been using the Internet for 16+
years, it is my understanding that cross-posting is *far* more
preferable than multi-posting.

You know, in the future I could always multi-post articles, if that
would make you happy. That way, people reading in one NG would be unable
to see answers to the same post in another NG.
Do you seriously expect constructive replies after that?
It’s always a fool’s hope to expect constructive replies from Usenet,
especially with more complicated or more detailed posts. That’s why I
tried to weed out those who would just parrot back that which I clearly
stated I wasn’t interested in, or had already discounted.

And yes, the more precise or more technical an article I post, the more
people that reply with an answer I had already clearly stated that I
discounted, or clearly stated I had no interest in. Hence, my attempt to
“focus” people.
My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
Problem solved.
I have far more problems with HTML and “quirks mode” rendering
differences between browsers with HTML that I have ever had with XHTML.
Or, if you insist on using XHTML in spite of its many well-known problems,
Its *many* well-know problems? I know of only two problems - Internet
Explorer’s inability to handle application/xhtml+xml, and (by proxy)
IE’s “quirks mode” problems with the XML Prologue(which can be fixed by
getting it to conduct an XSLT transformation on a document served up as
application/xml).

Otherwise, XHTML 1.1 works just fine for me.
don't come back here asking for solutions to the problems you've insisted
on creating for yourself, and insulting the very people who tried to tell
you how to avoid those problems in the first place.
Confusing cause and effect, are we? Having trouble with temporal
effects? You are the first person to reply to this post, dearie. No-one
has *tried* to help me with *this* post and *this* issue yet. Try to
avoid time-travel in the future, k? Pardon the pun.

Cheers.
...Geshel
--
*************** *************** *************** *************** *********
My return e-mail address is an automatically monitored spam honeypot.
Do not send e-mail there unless you wish to be reported as a spammer.
Please send all e-mail to my first name at my last name dot org, with
a subject-line of “NEWSGROUP REPLY FOR NEO GESHEL” (all uppercase).
*************** *************** *************** *************** *********
Apr 20 '07 #3
Neo Geshel wrote:
Sherm Pendley wrote:
>Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
>>NOTE: PAST EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT MANY ON USENET FAIL TO READ
posts by arrogant bastards who think they're better than mere humans.
>>
You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to post it
that way.

Would you rather I multi-post? Having been using the Internet for 16+
years, it is my understanding that cross-posting is *far* more
preferable than multi-posting.
You are not excused to do something stupid and rude by threatening to do
something even more stupid and rude. And if you've really got 16 years
of experience of using the Internet, maybe you'd know how to narrow down
appropriate NGs. Or maybe that 16 years of Internet experience includes
only 16 minutes of USENET experience?
>
You know, in the future I could always multi-post articles, if that
would make you happy. That way, people reading in one NG would be unable
to see answers to the same post in another NG.
Um, thanks, but we already know what's wrong with multi-posting. What'd
you do, just Google this up in the last half-hour?
>Do you seriously expect constructive replies after that?


It’s always a fool’s hope to expect constructive replies from Usenet,
....and yet, you came here; what's that say about you?
especially with more complicated or more detailed posts. That’s why I
tried to weed out those who would just parrot back that which I clearly
stated I wasn’t interested in, or had already discounted.

And yes, the more precise or more technical an article I post, the more
people that reply with an answer I had already clearly stated that I
discounted, or clearly stated I had no interest in. Hence, my attempt to
“focus” people.
Too bad you don't have a two-by-four you can whack us with, or maybe a
Taser; that'd get our attention. Pity you have to resort to such crude
means as using words and ALL CAPS.
>
>My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
Problem solved.


I have far more problems with HTML and “quirks mode” rendering
differences between browsers with HTML that I have ever had with XHTML.
Then induce *standards* mode. Combine this with Sherm's suggestion and
(Please pay attention here; I WANT YOU TO *FOCUS*) you get HTML in
standards mode.
>
You are the first person to reply to this post, dearie. No-one
has *tried* to help me with *this* post and *this* issue yet.
I suggest you not expect a long line of helpful folks. Dearie.

--
John
Apr 20 '07 #4
Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
Sherm Pendley wrote:
>Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
>>NOTE: PAST EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT MANY ON USENET FAIL TO READ
ARTICLES PROPERLY PRIOR TO ANSWERING. I AM LOOKING FOR VERY SPECIFIC
INFORMATION , THEREFORE PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THOROUGHLY BEFORE
RESPONDING; OR ASK QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY. I *WILL* APPRECIATE ANY
CONSTRUCTIV E REPLY.

You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to post it
that way.

Would you rather I multi-post?
No, I would rather you choose one group. This doesn't belong in .misc, or
in .site-design, and alt.html is well-nigh useless.
>My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
Problem solved.

I have far more problems with HTML and “quirks mode” rendering
differences between browsers
This is getting to be a common theme for you, complaining about problems
you've created for yourself. If quirks mode causes problems, use a DTD
that doesn't trigger it. Problem solved.
>don't come back here asking for solutions to the problems you've insisted
on creating for yourself, and insulting the very people who tried to tell
you how to avoid those problems in the first place.

Confusing cause and effect, are we?
No, "we" aren't. You seriously think you're the first person to try this?
Do you think that the advice given to everyone else who has tried it will
be any different for you?

Get over yourself and type "XHTML" into a Google Groups search. Then read
and learn.

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Apr 21 '07 #5
Sherm Pendley wrote:
Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
>Sherm Pendley wrote:
>>Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:

NOTE: PAST EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT MANY ON USENET FAIL TO READ
ARTICLES PROPERLY PRIOR TO ANSWERING. I AM LOOKING FOR VERY SPECIFIC
INFORMATIO N, THEREFORE PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THOROUGHLY BEFORE
RESPONDING ; OR ASK QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY. I *WILL* APPRECIATE ANY
CONSTRUCTI VE REPLY.
You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to postit
that way.
Would you rather I multi-post?
No, I would rather you choose one group. This doesn't belong in .misc, or
in .site-design, and alt.html is well-nigh useless.
okay, .misc was useless. I agree. But .site-design was chosen because,
had you actually read to the end of the post, you would have seen that I
am also requesting design critiques.

But alt.html is one of the busiest NG for html/xhtml. And looking for a
relevant response always boils down to the law of averages.

As for both multiposting *and* crossposting being inappropriate, let’s
see what Wikipedia says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossposting

Hmm.... I appear to be a rather good Netcitizen when it comes to
multi/crossposting. If I were to drop the .misc, then all of the other
NG’s would be on-topic for my *original* post. In fact, I could probably
have added alt.html.critiq ue, due to my request for a design critique at
the end of the post.
>>My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
Problem solved.
I have far more problems with HTML and “quirks mode” rendering
differences between browsers
This is getting to be a common theme for you, complaining about problems
you've created for yourself. If quirks mode causes problems, use a DTD
that doesn't trigger it. Problem solved.
There is no DTD that can, by itself, do as good a job as { XHTML 1.1 DTD
+ [application/xml for IE | application/xhtml+xml for everything else] +
XML Prolog [ + XSLT Transformation for IE] } across the “big three” of
IE, Firefox and Opera.

Besides, I have, at least on my own machine, achieved “purity”. I have
managed to implement a perfect XHTML 1.1 page, conforming to all of the
XHTML 1.1 specs, that works across both IE and Mozilla/Opera.

However, because I have multiple copies of IE on my machine (from v3 to
v7), I am unsure if my copies of [5 <= IE < 7] are providing accurate
results, and all the other WinDoze machines available to me are XP
boxen, and those have already upgraded to IE 7. Hence my request for
field results from other people using [5 <= IE < 7], which was the *only
thing* I actually requested in my post. You would have realized this,
had you actually taken the time to read the entire post.

Should I start spoon-feeding the Usenet community the specifics of what
I look for? Is it really that hard to properly read a post before
answering??
>>don't come back here asking for solutions to the problems you've insisted
on creating for yourself, and insulting the very people who tried to tell
you how to avoid those problems in the first place.
Confusing cause and effect, are we?
No, "we" aren't. You seriously think you're the first person to try this?
Do you think that the advice given to everyone else who has tried it will
be any different for you?
No, but I make it a point to mention what I have already tried, what I
have discounted because I am not going in that direction, and what my
objectives are. The problem I run into is that people tend to answer my
posts with advice that mirrors things I have clearly mentioned that I
have already done; as if they failed to read the whole post to begin
with. Hence, my attempt to “focus” readers into the same direction that
I am attempting to go.
Get over yourself and type "XHTML" into a Google Groups search. Then read
and learn.
I wasn’t looking for advice. I had clearly stated in my post thatI was
looking for *field results* from the link I posted. I wanted to see if
people managed to run into any errors that I haven’t been able to.

To wit: The site works just fine with [5 <= IE < 7] on my machine. Does
it work fine on your copy of [5 <= IE < 7] too? If yes, ignore post and
move on. If no, tell me (along with specifics), so I know that there is
at least *one* person out there that has a problem.

Or in other words, RTFP.

Cheers.
...Geshel
--
*************** *************** *************** *************** ***********
My return e-mail address is an automatically monitored spam honeypot.
Do not send e-mail there unless you wish to be reported as a spammer.
Please send all e-mail to my first name at my last name dot org, with
a subject-line of “NEWSGROUP REPLY FOR NEO GESHEL” (alluppercase).
*************** *************** *************** *************** ***********
Apr 21 '07 #6
John Hosking wrote:
Neo Geshel wrote:
>Sherm Pendley wrote:
>>Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:

NOTE: PAST EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT MANY ON USENET FAIL TO READ
posts by arrogant bastards who think they're better than mere humans.
>>>
You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to postit
that way.

Would you rather I multi-post? Having been using the Internet for 16+
years, it is my understanding that cross-posting is *far* more
preferable than multi-posting.
You are not excused to do something stupid and rude by threatening to do
something even more stupid and rude. And if you've really got 16 years
of experience of using the Internet, maybe you'd know how to narrow down
appropriate NGs. Or maybe that 16 years of Internet experience includes
only 16 minutes of USENET experience?
>>
You know, in the future I could always multi-post articles, if that
would make you happy. That way, people reading in one NG would be
unable to see answers to the same post in another NG.
Um, thanks, but we already know what's wrong with multi-posting. What'd
you do, just Google this up in the last half-hour?
No, it was an attempt to contrast what would be, at the most, a minor
gaffe (when cross-posting incorrectly), with a major faux-pas
(multi-posting). Cross-posting, when done correctly and in moderation,
is a healthy way of posting on Usenet. It only becomes damaging when
there are excessive (5+) groups targeted, and when most groups (if not
all) are completely off-topic with the content of the post. Neither case
matches my method of cross-posting.

But hey, if you really want to learn about cross-posting and
multi-posting *yourself*, here’s the article I found most succinct:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossposting

Clearly, I haven’t been doing much of anything wrong in terms of
cross-posting.
>>Do you seriously expect constructive replies after that?


It’s always a fool’s hope to expect constructive replies from Usenet,
...and yet, you came here; what's that say about you?
And all you provide is ridicule and sarcasm. What does that say about you?
>especially with more complicated or more detailed posts. That’s why I
tried to weed out those who would just parrot back that which I
clearly stated I wasn’t interested in, or had already discounted.

And yes, the more precise or more technical an article I post, the
more people that reply with an answer I had already clearly stated
that I discounted, or clearly stated I had no interest in. Hence, my
attempt to “focus” people.
Too bad you don't have a two-by-four you can whack us with, or maybe a
Taser; that'd get our attention. Pity you have to resort to such crude
means as using words and ALL CAPS.
I will use whatever works to get people to read the *whole* post
*before* answering. Tried it for the first time today, will see how it
ends up. If I actually get some *field results* (the objective of my
post, had anyone actually read it), then I might consider using such a
“focusing” method again. If I get no on-topic and appropriate replies,
then obviously, I will abandon that method.
>>
>>My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
Problem solved.


I have far more problems with HTML and “quirks mode” rendering
differences between browsers with HTML that I have ever had with XHTML.
Then induce *standards* mode. Combine this with Sherm's suggestion and
(Please pay attention here; I WANT YOU TO *FOCUS*) you get HTML in
standards mode.
And why should I go backwards to HTML? XHTML is working just fine for
me, on my own machine. I have gotten everything to work perfectly, In
full “standards compliance” mode, to boot. My post was about getting
*field results* from anyone who can view the link with [5 <= IE < 7]
that is not multi-installed beside IE 7.

Or didn’t you read that far?
>You are the first person to reply to this post, dearie. No-one has
*tried* to help me with *this* post and *this* issue yet.
I suggest you not expect a long line of helpful folks. Dearie.
Fair enough. You’ve given your opinion. Good-bye.

...Geshel
--
*************** *************** *************** *************** ***********
My return e-mail address is an automatically monitored spam honeypot.
Do not send e-mail there unless you wish to be reported as a spammer.
Please send all e-mail to my first name at my last name dot org, with
a subject-line of “NEWSGROUP REPLY FOR NEO GESHEL” (alluppercase).
*************** *************** *************** *************** ***********
Apr 21 '07 #7
Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
Sherm Pendley wrote:
>Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
>>Sherm Pendley wrote:

You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to post it
that way.
Would you rather I multi-post?

No, I would rather you choose one group. This doesn't belong in .misc, or
in .site-design, and alt.html is well-nigh useless.

okay, .misc was useless. I agree. But .site-design was chosen because,
had you actually read to the end of the post, you would have seen that
I am also requesting design critiques.
I did read the whole post. Why would I respond to something I hadn't read?
You asked for advice about technical problems you're having with XHTML, not
about the layout, navigability, color palette, or other design issues.
But alt.html is one of the busiest NG for html/xhtml.
I didn't say it wasn't busy, I said it was useless. Alt.html is where amateurs
go where they can feed of one another's ignorance without being interrupted by
facts and good advice.

Come to think of it, the advice you'd get there is probably exactly what you'd
call "proper" - workarounds and hacks that compensate to varying degrees for a
basically flawed idea, with no one pointing out to you that it'd be much easier
to simply avoid the problem in the first place.
>>>My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
Problem solved.
I have far more problems with HTML and “quirks mode” rendering
differences between browsers

This is getting to be a common theme for you, complaining about problems
you've created for yourself. If quirks mode causes problems, use a DTD
that doesn't trigger it. Problem solved.

There is no DTD that can, by itself, do as good a job as { XHTML 1.1
DTD + [application/xml for IE | application/xhtml+xml for everything
else] + XML Prolog [ + XSLT Transformation for IE] } across the “big
three” of IE, Firefox and Opera.
First you come here talking of the difficulties your "solution" is causing
you, now you're claiming it does "as good a job" of avoiding quirks mode as
the recommended solution. Make up your mind.

Plain HTML with a DTD that triggers standards-mode requires no browser
sniffing, no games with the MIME type, and no XSLT transforms to make it
work with IE. Something that does require you to jump through these hoops
is most certainly *not* doing as good a job.
Should I start spoon-feeding the Usenet community the specifics of
what I look for? Is it really that hard to properly read a post before
answering??
I know what you're looking for - you're looking for the magic silver bullet
that will make XHTML work perfectly for every browser.

There is none. Get over it.
Hence, my attempt to “focus” readers into the same direction
that I am attempting to go.
You are going in the wrong direction; no amount of "focus" will change that.
I wasn’t looking for advice.
Too bad. This is usenet - you get advice whether you want it or not. One
would think, in all those many years of experience you claim to have, you
would have learned that.
Or in other words, RTFP.
I did read it. I'm just not the slightest bit interested in helping you jump
through the hoops you're creating for yourself with your stubborn insistence
on using XHTML. It offers no benefits to you or the end user, and (as you've
discovered) cannot be delivered in a reliably compatible fashion.

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Apr 21 '07 #8
Neo Geshel <go****@geshel. orgwrites:
Clearly, I haven’t been doing much of anything wrong in terms of
cross-posting.
You were off-topic in two of the four groups you posted to.
I will use whatever works to get people to read the *whole* post
*before* answering.
Being polite works well for that. Much better, in fact, than shouting
at and insulting the people whose attention you're hoping to retain.
And why should I go backwards to HTML? XHTML is working just fine for
me, on my own machine.
Because first, it's not backwards. It's still the standard, and XHTML
hasn't yet gotten to the point where it's reliably compatible.

And second, the point is that, however well XHTML may work on your own
machine, there are a *lot* of other machines out there on which it
does not work, and won't in the forseeable future.
Fair enough. You’ve given your opinion. Good-bye.
Oh, so you get to decide when the thread's over now, and who's allowed
to post to it? Who made you King of Usenet?

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Apr 21 '07 #9
Sherm Pendley wrote:
First you come here talking of the difficulties your "solution" is causing
you, now you're claiming it does "as good a job" of avoiding quirks mode as
the recommended solution. Make up your mind.
An analysis of my original post.

First paragraph after the “Greetings” :
I explain the objective of what I have accomplished: a “perfect”
XHTML 1.1 implementation.

Second paragraph:
I explain the problems that I had (past tense) ran into with
implementing XHTML 1.1 on IE, and provided an explanation of my
workaround for IE’s inability to handle application/xhtml+xml, and why I
had to use application/xml instead of text/html.

Third paragraph:
An explanation of the error I ran into when I *tried* (again, past
tense) to use the XSLT transformation with a *standard* XHTML doctype,
with the actual on-screen example bounded by <output></output>.

Fourth paragraph:
MY SOLUTION (already implemented): An “enhanced” XHTML1.1 DOCTYPE
just for IE that is W3C-approved. SUCCESS! I have achieved a “perfect”
XHTML implementation!

Fifth paragraph (and bulleted list):
MY BIG WORRY, AND THEREFORE WHAT I AM REQUESTING: Does this solution
work only for me? Does my setup (IE7, with side-by-side installs of IE 5
to 6) work simply because IE 5 to 6 exist in a side-by-side install? And
finally, does this example of full XHTML implementation work with
*anyone* who has *just* IE6, or *just* IE5.5, or *just* IE5?
Essentially, “if anyone who receives the error message (as seen
above) when viewing my example with IE, could they please tell me”.

Final paragraphs:
An open offer to critique the design, a link to the page in question,
and a warning that the design might change without notice.
Summary of this analysis:
Paragraph 1 was the overview of my objective.
Paragraphs 2 through 4 was background information (a description of
the problems I encountered and the process I used to achieve success).
Paragraph 5 was a request for others to double-check my work to
ensure I was right - that IE 5-7 works flawlessly with the example, and
does not throw an error.

Was my post really so complicated that you couldn’t figure it out? How
close to pablum do I need to make my posts so that they can be
understood? At no time did I ever ask for help in fixing a problem. The
problem was already fixed, and I took pains to make that clear. What I
wanted was for people to double-check my work, to see if IE from v5
onward worked correctly, without throwing an XSLT processing error.

...Geshel
--
*************** *************** *************** *************** ***********
My return e-mail address is an automatically monitored spam honeypot.
Do not send e-mail there unless you wish to be reported as a spammer.
Please send all e-mail to my first name at my last name dot org, with
a subject-line of “NEWSGROUP REPLY FOR NEO GESHEL” (alluppercase).
*************** *************** *************** *************** ***********
Apr 21 '07 #10

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

5
2632
by: Edward Mitchell | last post by:
Is there a way that I can repair MS Internet Explorer? I seem to have broken it somewhere. I have been developing a .NET app. Three days ago I saw a message box in a web site that I visit saying "Syntax error; Line 14". I cleared that (hit button not to debug) and then the another message box popped up on a mouse over event that said a "Runtime error has occurred. Line 85: Object expected." I looked at the source and line 85 contained a...
2
1885
by: David | last post by:
Hello. Can anybody tell me do I open any web page from my code in Internet Explorer? Or how can I just run any program from my code?
0
1183
by: Marco Mendonça | last post by:
Hi, I have a Template wich customizes Word toolbars and menus. I need to open this template in Internet Explorer and i expect that the Embedded Word will be customized as if the same Template was opened in a normal instance of Word. Is this possible? The thing is: when i try to open the Template in internet explorer (note that i'm using a browser embedded in a WindowsForm), the Embedded Word is not customized at all...
2
2290
by: CathieC | last post by:
I have a websote developed using visual studio 2005 beta , .net version 2 i deploy my application to a server and it is run from client computers. One of the users gets the error "Internet Explorer cannot open the internet site "XXXXX" Operation aborted" this happens when they click on a menu item to open a page. they do not get
3
11489
by: laredotornado | last post by:
Hi, This problem only affects PC IE. On a secured page (a page visited via https), there is a link that reads -- "Download HTML File". The link connects to this page <?php require("../../util_fns.php"); session_start();
9
7722
by: Etayki | last post by:
Hi! I am new to VB.net and I am using the Visual Basic 2005 Express Edition I have two questions: 1. I am trying to write an application that will automate Internet Explorer and store data in a database. Am I better off learning VB.net or C#.net? Is there a free development environment for C# as well?
8
1580
by: underage313 | last post by:
My OS is Windows XP Home edition I use Internet explorer 6 and I also installed the mozilla firefox but recenrly I can't browse any web site by Internet Explorer and also I can't sign in with yahoo messenger too what should I do? Thanks a lot for your help
2
1202
by: =?Utf-8?B?bWFycmNoaWU=?= | last post by:
Hi ther can anyone help me, I was able to acess my employers website, up until a few days ago, I have all the help from theit it support they can give me, they say its my provider, but I have been through every diagnostics they can do also and is not a connection problem, I have contacted my computer manufacturer and they have said its not my computer as they cannot access the site either, microsoft have suggested I try to get help here, I...
1
4839
by: avpkills2002 | last post by:
I seem to be getting this weird problem in Internet explorer. I have written a code for parsing a XML file and displaying the output. The code works perfectly fine with ffx(Firefox).However is not working in Internet Explorer.(I m using Internet Explorer 6.0). The code is as follows: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http:// www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html...
0
8572
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it. First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
1
8847
by: Hystou | last post by:
Overview: Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
0
7661
agi2029
by: agi2029 | last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development projectplanning, coding, testing, and deploymentwithout human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own.... Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
1
6491
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupr who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules. He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms. Adolph will...
0
5839
by: conductexam | last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one. At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image. Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
0
4340
by: TSSRALBI | last post by:
Hello I'm a network technician in training and I need your help. I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs. The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols. I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
0
4579
by: adsilva | last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
1
3003
by: 6302768590 | last post by:
Hai team i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
2
2272
muto222
by: muto222 | last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.