By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
435,512 Members | 3,689 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 435,512 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

I'm doing something wrong, please Help.

P: n/a
Hi all,

I've been working on a simple two column layout for a site, but according to
browsershots.org, my desing is not showing up correctly in Win/IE 5.01, 5.5
& 6 !

Please see details here:
http://browsershots.org/screenshots/...ae00a03fcbbf9/
Please note that only IE7 got the design right.

What am I missing? Pages have a Strict XHTML DTD to use IE in standards
compliant mode, and I also included some conditional comments for IE6...
What else?

Any help would be _greatly_ appreciated!
Thanks in advance.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Jan 8 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
9 Replies


P: n/a
Randy wrote:
>
I've been working on a simple two column layout for a site, but according to
browsershots.org, my desing is not showing up correctly in Win/IE 5.01, 5.5
& 6 !

What am I missing?
A URL

--
Berg
Jan 8 '07 #2

P: n/a
Randy wrote:
Hi all,

I've been working on a simple two column layout for a site, but according to
browsershots.org, my desing is not showing up correctly in Win/IE 5.01, 5.5
& 6 !

Please see details here:
http://browsershots.org/screenshots/...ae00a03fcbbf9/
Please note that only IE7 got the design right.

What am I missing? Pages have a Strict XHTML DTD to use IE in standards
compliant mode, and I also included some conditional comments for IE6...
What else?

Any help would be _greatly_ appreciated!
Thanks in advance.

Why can't I reply to this post?

--
John (confused)
Jan 8 '07 #3

P: n/a
Randy wrote:
Hi all,

I've been working on a simple two column layout for a site, but according to
browsershots.org, my desing is not showing up correctly in Win/IE 5.01, 5.5
& 6 !

Please see details here:
http://browsershots.org/screenshots/...ae00a03fcbbf9/
Please note that only IE7 got the design right.

What am I missing? Pages have a Strict XHTML DTD to use IE in standards
compliant mode, and I also included some conditional comments for IE6...
What else?
I looked at http://www.vinculando.org/arte/temple_mexico.html. I did not
study your code or CSS much, but I did see the mostly empty page in IE6.
The content appears briefly on load but then disappears. Everything
between (roughly) the google_ads and the footer is removed/hidden.

I think you'd be better off coding in HTML 4.01 Strict. You go to the
trouble of "XHTML 1.0 Strict", but then you serve it to all UAs as
Content- Type: text/html; charset=utf-8. Also, you have a validation
error, so I suspect you didn't try to validate.

This all suggests that you are not using XHTML for a sound reason, as
you are getting no benefit from it, and are only having problems.

Maybe you should read
http://www.456bereastreet.com/archiv...html_properly/
or http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml ?

HTH
--
John
Jan 8 '07 #4

P: n/a
John Hosking wrote:
Why can't I reply to this post?
Okay folks, sorry about that; my real reply actually got posted. I was
having trouble with this >Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8< in it
(I guess) but when I slipped a space in there, it worked.

--
John (a bit wiser, but still confused)
Jan 8 '07 #5

P: n/a
Thanks for your time John,

but even though I've changed to HTML 4.01, and validated one page, it still
apprears to have the same problem. Are there any other ideas? Could it be
something wrong in the CSS itself?

Berg, try this:
http://www.vinculando.org/brasil/voto_hh_nao_pt.html
On 1/8/07 10:36 AM, John Hosking wrote 45**********@news.bluewin.ch:
I think you'd be better off coding in HTML 4.01 Strict. You go to the
trouble of "XHTML 1.0 Strict", but then you serve it to all UAs as
Content- Type: text/html; charset=utf-8. Also, you have a validation
error, so I suspect you didn't try to validate.

This all suggests that you are not using XHTML for a sound reason, as
you are getting no benefit from it, and are only having problems.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Jan 8 '07 #6

P: n/a
Randy wrote:
but even though I've changed to HTML 4.01, and validated one page, it still
apprears to have the same problem. Are there any other ideas? Could it be
something wrong in the CSS itself?

Berg, try this:
http://www.vinculando.org/brasil/voto_hh_nao_pt.html
With some minimal testing, it seems to work if you remove all of the
position: relative and position: absolute from the style sheet.
There really shouldn't be any need for those.

Try to make a much smaller test case if that doesn't solve it. There is
a lot of CSS there to use as a test.

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
Jan 8 '07 #7

P: n/a
Beauregard,

Thanks a lot, that worked out very well on all browsers!

Best regards to all :)

W.

>
With some minimal testing, it seems to work if you remove all of the
position: relative and position: absolute from the style sheet.
There really shouldn't be any need for those.

Try to make a much smaller test case if that doesn't solve it. There is
a lot of CSS there to use as a test.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Jan 8 '07 #8

P: n/a
Randy wrote:
Beauregard,

Thanks a lot, that worked out very well on all browsers!
Whoohoo. I had a similar problem years ago, with IE6, and removing
absolute (and relative) positioning cured that. I think it is a rare
case where they are needed.
Best regards to all :)
To you as well.

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
Jan 8 '07 #9

P: n/a
Beauregard,

Just one last thing: I only removed position:relative lines and then
everything was ok. It seems that position:absolute had no connection with
the problem in this case ;)

Thanks again for your time.
>
Whoohoo. I had a similar problem years ago, with IE6, and removing
absolute (and relative) positioning cured that. I think it is a rare
case where they are needed.
>Best regards to all :)

To you as well.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Jan 9 '07 #10

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.