Inconsistent results across browsers

[Dudely]

My web page displays just fine under IE7, but under IE6 about 90% of
it is just plain missing. I get the top of the page, and the bottom
of the page... but not the middle. I have not tested with any other
browsers.

The page is at www.greengoldcapital.com

I use considerable amounts of CSS, and a lot of other things including
javascript, SSI, PHP, mySQL, and a partridge in a pear tree. I have a
third party application integrated in, as well as "tips & tricks" I'm
using from others, some of which are way over my head; especially the
menu.

I'm at a loss as to where to even start looking for the problem. I
was thinking maybe it was a css issue, yet I use css on the part that
shows up too. As far as I can tell, there's nothing especially
different about what shows up versus what doesn't show up... so I'm
stumped at this point.

Thank you for any good ideas.

[Andy Dingley]

On 1 Jun, 20:29, Dudely <ab3...@gmail.c omwrote:

My web page displays just fine under IE7, but under IE6 about 90% of
it is just plain missing.

Don't EVER use this:
if ((navigator.app Version.indexOf ("MSIE") 0)
&& (parseInt(navig ator.appVersion ) <= 6)) {

Don't EVER use this:
<!--[if lt IE 7]>

You might use this, but I strongly advise against it.
<!--[if gt IE 7]>

If you must use IE conditionals, then the only safe form to use is
this one:
<!--[if IE]>

The reasoning is to do with the "fall back" behaviour in browsers that
correctly ignore this M$oft-specific extension.
Some general rules on web design (in order)

* Write standards-based code that passes HTML and CSS validation.

* Adjust the design until you're happy that it works in a standards-
compliant browser. I suggest Firefox and the Marc Geuery HTML
validator extension.

* Keep checking that it's _still_ valid!

* See how badly the broken IE mangles it. Fix, work-around or avoid
particular pieces of the standard that IE can't cope with.

* Use the <!--[if IE]form to fix anything you can't possible fix by
other means.

* Don't use an IE-only feature unless you absolutely _must_, and
you're already experienced enough to do valid standards-based design
and coding for other standards-based browsers.

* Never use an "If not IE" test. They fail outside IE, so always use
the "If IE" form instead.

* Never test for specific IE versions. This gives non-robust code that
costs a lot in maintenance when IE changes.

* NEVER break the validation, the standards-based code, or the
behaviour in other browsers just to try and keep IE happy.

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Scripsit Andy Dingley:

Don't EVER use this:
if ((navigator.app Version.indexOf ("MSIE") 0)
&& (parseInt(navig ator.appVersion ) <= 6)) {

If you do browser sniffing regarding IE, that trick works roughly as well as
the alternatives. I don't think it's particular useful to nitpick on it.

Don't EVER use this:
<!--[if lt IE 7]>

You sound very dogmatic, but in a pointless way. You can declare all browser
sniffing as wrong, and that would be a defendable though a bit too
idealistic viewpoint. But if you approve browser sniffing at all, surely you
need to recognize the fundamental difference between IE 7 and previous
versions of IE.

If you must use IE conditionals, then the only safe form to use is
this one:
<!--[if IE]>

Sorry, but that's not only ridiculous - it will also confuse newbies if you
take you seriously.

The reasoning is to do with the "fall back" behaviour in browsers that
correctly ignore this M$oft-specific extension.

There's no "fall back". They simply just read the style sheet by the book
and ignore the part that they are expected to ignore, no matter whether you
have [if IE] or [if lt IE 7].

* Never use an "If not IE" test.

What strawman is that?

* Never test for specific IE versions. This gives non-robust code that
costs a lot in maintenance when IE changes.

You're completely wrong. If your page works fine on browsers other than IE
_and_ on IE 7, it would be foolish to tell IE 7 to use the tricks that you
have written to make IE 6 behave.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[rf]

"Andy Dingley" <di*****@codesm iths.comwrote in message
news:11******** *************@q 69g2000hsb.goog legroups.com...

* Never test for specific IE versions. This gives non-robust code that
costs a lot in maintenance when IE changes.

Disagree.

<!--[if IE 6]allows me to inject a bit of javascript skulduggery that
makes {position: fixed} sort of work for those still using this specific
browser. (javascript *must* be enabled to use the page anyway). Same with
the javascript solution to CSS dropdown menus in IE6 although I also employ
a non-javascript degredation.

No other browser will see this javascript. I have nothing to 'maintain' in
the future, other than to someday remove the code when IE6 dies.

--
Richard.

[Andy Dingley]

On 4 Jun, 12:14, "Jukka K. Korpela" <[e-mail] t.fiwrote:

You sound very dogmatic, but in a pointless way.

Do _you_ really expect a reply to that?

[Andy Dingley]

On 4 Jun, 12:35, "rf" <r...@invalid.c omwrote:

<!--[if IE 6]allows me to inject a bit of javascript skulduggery that
makes {position: fixed} sort of work for those still using this specific
browser.

This sort of "If old version" test is certainly more stable than
something using "If new version". That's the real problem, and the
one that needs to be guarded against carefully.

If there _is_ an old version though, why go to this extra trouble to
support it? It's already an "old" version that's withering away, or
else it's not yet safe enough to treat it this way. If so, why embed
what's becoming obsolete cruft into your shiny new pages?

It's not 1999 any more, browser compatibility isn't still so bad that
you're forced into supporting browser vagaries because it's the only
way to achieve a useful page.

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Scripsit Andy Dingley:

On 4 Jun, 12:14, "Jukka K. Korpela" <[e-mail] t.fiwrote:

>You sound very dogmatic, but in a pointless way.

Do _you_ really expect a reply to that?

Of course not. It was not a question.

Thank you for confirming my observations by this posting of yours, where you
did not make any comment on the substance and just wasted bandwidth and
everyone's time with a foolish question. You confirmed my observations,
since you are known to be an intelligent person, who would surely have
presented rational counterargument s if he had one.

We conclude that <!--[if lt IE 7]... <![endif]and similar pseudocomments
are a good way of dealing with problems in IE, _if_ an authors decides to
use browser sniffing.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[Sherm Pendley]

Andy Dingley <di*****@codesm iths.comwrites:

* Never use an "If not IE" test. They fail outside IE

I never use IE conditionals myself, but I don't understand this advice.
Isn't the whole point of an "if not IE" test that it will fail outside IE?
IE will parse the conditional and find it negative. Other browsers will
ignore the conditional, so they will render its contents, same as if
they'd parsed it as positive.

sherm--

--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

[Andy Dingley]

On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:36:36 -0400, Sherm Pendley <sp******@dot-app.org>
wrote:

>Andy Dingley <di*****@codesm iths.comwrites:

>* Never use an "If not IE" test. They fail outside IE

I never use IE conditionals myself, but I don't understand this advice.
Isn't the whole point of an "if not IE" test that it will fail outside IE?

No, that's the "If IE" form. Non-IE browsers then see them as a coment.
Your valid argument is the justification for my practice.