By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
437,648 Members | 1,203 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 437,648 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Mac IE choking on site: why??

P: n/a
Hi guys,

http://www.corinneschippert.com

css: http://www.corinneschippert.com/corinne.css

Site (XHTML-Strict; validates) works on Mozilla, Win IE 6, but does not
display properly on Mac IE 5.2. Cannot, for the life of me, figure out
what the problem is.

Any ideas?

Thanks in advance,
Shaun

--
(Remove the capital Z from the address)
Jul 20 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
9 Replies


P: n/a
Shaun Wolf Wortis wrote:
http://www.corinneschippert.com
Why have you specified a font-size that is significantly smaller than
what I find comfortable? FYI: I increased it back to what I wanted in
the first place -- you may insist on fighting with me over this, but
I'll always win because my browser lets me control such matters. After
getting it back to what I wanted in the first place, the grey text at
the top was partially covering the photo, providing poor contrast (grey
on grey), making it hard to read.

You also provide no way of figuring out what is a link and what isn't.
It's called "mystery meat" navigation. It might seem cool, but it is bad
for usability.

And what the friggin heck is with the popup on the "contact" page. There
is no reason for a popup. And there is *NO* reason to take away my
toolbars. Leave my ui alone, thank you. It was disorienting for me, and
I'm a power web surfer. Pity the poor amateur.
css: http://www.corinneschippert.com/corinne.css
Thank you for posting a link to the css. Thanks also for validating your
code before asking for help here. (I'm not all negative, you know.) :-)
Site (XHTML-Strict; validates)
HTML is more robust; in almost every case, it's a better choice.
works on Mozilla, Win IE 6, but does not display properly
What does that mean? "does not display properly" is not much better than
"is broke," and doesn't help me understand what you want.
on Mac IE 5.2.


I noticed you have an import statement.

@import url(corinne.css);

Note that IE/Mac is very particular about the syntax of such statements.
I don't have a Mac, so I cannot test what specifically works and what
doesn't. I can tell you that I tried things that conform to the spec,
but that didn't work. I now use this format:

@import "corinne.css";

It works on Mac IE.

--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/
Jul 20 '05 #2

P: n/a
Op Tue, 04 May 2004 11:47:47 -0400, schreef Brian:
Shaun Wolf Wortis wrote:
http://www.corinneschippert.com


[cut: but I do like to control my own screen too...]
css: http://www.corinneschippert.com/corinne.css works on Mozilla, Win IE 6, but does not display properly
on Mac IE 5.2.


I noticed you have an import statement.

@import url(corinne.css);


I don't own a Mac either, and ran into the same problem a few days ago. I
wanted to use the @import statement to make NN 4.X ignore the CSS, but
then ran into the problem of Mac IE 5.2 ignoring the import of CSS. A
solution that was suggested "Conditional comments" goes this way:

<!--[if IE]>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="assets/css/iehack.css">
<![endif]-->

But uhu... Mac IE 5.2 doesn't support conditional comments. However, that
code does a good job for applying the IE-only CSS.

I'm trying this tonight:
http://www.premonition.co.uk/cssd/ie51-only.html

I'll let you know if it works...

grtz

Vincent

--
http://lilly.csoft.net/~vdebaere/
http://otlet.sourceforge.net/

Jul 20 '05 #3

P: n/a
In article <10*************@corp.supernews.com>,
Brian <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote:

[Other stuff irrelevant to my question, but general answer is: a) it
looks good and I believe in sites that look good b) I make sites for
clients who sometimes have specific needs/desires -- in the case of
popups without toobars the photographer did not like the toolbar as it
was distracting. I agreed. This is a site after all about photographs..]
Site (XHTML-Strict; validates)


HTML is more robust; in almost every case, it's a better choice.


?
works on Mozilla, Win IE 6, but does not display properly


What does that mean? "does not display properly" is not much better than
"is broke," and doesn't help me understand what you want.


I guess the question is mostly for folks with a Mac as it's hard to
describe what's happening since I don't understand it.. On index.htm,
nothing but the main photo, the lower menu and the copyright info is
being displayed. The top menu, the tan-colored bars, and the Best of
Boston logo are gone -- likely behind the photo, although I don't know.
on Mac IE 5.2.


I noticed you have an import statement.

@import url(corinne.css);


Actually I use: @import "corinne.css";
Jul 20 '05 #4

P: n/a
On Tue, 04 May 2004 12:39:18 -0400, Shaun Wolf Wortis wrote:
...general answer is: a) it looks good...


To who? You?

Are you the only user of your site?
You may well be if you take that attitude.

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
Jul 20 '05 #5

P: n/a
On Tue, 4 May 2004, Shaun Wolf Wortis wrote:
[Other stuff irrelevant to my question, but general answer is: a) it
looks good and I believe in sites that look good
If you're suggesting that "looks good" is somehow incompatible with
proper web site engineering, then you're going to find quite a number
of folks around here who know better. I happen to be pretty useless
in the visual design area, so I'm sadly unable to offer any convincing
demonstrations myself, but that doesn't mean I can't recognise them
when I see them designed by others.
b) I make sites for clients who sometimes have specific
needs/desires
Actually, in a WWW context you're supposed to be making sites for the
people who will use them, rather than for those narcissistic clients
who're only interested in admiring their own work.

I've seen lots of cases where the client stated a "need" or "desire"
which was sheer incompatible with the real-life properties of the WWW;
our job is to help them come to terms with the properties and demands
of the medium - to capitalise on its strengths, and to avoid battering
oneself senseless on its weaknesses.
-- in the case of popups without toobars the photographer did not
like the toolbar as it was distracting. I agreed.


Maybe you could have advised him/her how to reconfigure their own
browser.

Mine's configured to deny popup windows anyway. So if you're lucky,
you'll get your picture shown in the same browser window. If you're
unlucky, you'll get nothing more shown than a little browser popup
alert alongside the browser's status area, and I'll likely just go
somewhere else, while thinking "what an ill-mannered web site". Is
that how you seek to compliment your client's work in the WWW context?

But it's all IMHO and YMMV. I'm sure the web is big enough.
Jul 20 '05 #6

P: n/a
Shaun Wolf Wortis wrote:
Brian wrote:

[Other stuff irrelevant to my question,
Welcome to usenet.
a) it looks good and I believe in sites that look good b) I make
sites for clients who sometimes have specific needs/desires
[note to those just tuning in: this comment appears to be in reply to my
complaining that the site uses microfonts]

Quote from Alan Flavell:

<quote>
What the client wants, and what the WWW will do, are not necessarily
the same thing. It's our job as developers to resolve such
inconsistences ;-}
</quote>
in the case of popups without toobars the photographer did not
like the toolbar as it was distracting. I agreed.
Then turn off the toolbars in your browser. Leave them alone in others'
browsers.
This is a site after all about photographs..]
What does the subject of the site have to do with usability? Or
respecting the visitor?
Site (XHTML-Strict; validates)


HTML is more robust; in almost every case, it's a better choice.


?


Sorry, I cannot understand what the question mark by itself is meant to
convey. Was my wording unclear? Or do you want more information about
the problems of XHTML?
I guess the question is mostly for folks with a Mac as it's hard to
describe what's happening since I don't understand it..
Perhaps you could provide a screen shot?
On index.htm, nothing but the main photo, the lower menu and the
copyright info is being displayed. The top menu, the tan-colored
bars, and the Best of Boston logo are gone -- likely behind the
photo, although I don't know.


Also, on info.htm, the top menu is mostly behind the content div. Only 1
link works ("contact," I think it says). Using Mozilla 1.6/Win2k.

Getting back to the home page:
It's very complicated markup and css for a very simple layout. I suggest
simplifying it. Since the photo has a fixed width by nature, create a
single div, centered, with width 741 pixels. Inside that, you need <h1>
(you have no h1 on that page) with corrinne shippert photo, the image,
and a menu div (or ul), a copyright div, and the best of boston image,
which I'd put as a foreground instead of background image.

Text-align center for h1, grey on tan. Menu and copyright text-align
right. The only element on which I'd use position: absolute or relative
is the Best of Boston image. I'd leave everything else static, with
perhaps one exception: it might make sense to position: relative the
main div in order to position the Best of Boston image absolute.
you have an import statement @import url(corinne.css);


Actually I use: @import "corinne.css";


Mozilla Developer Toolbar lied to me. It reported a different syntax,
but looking at source, I see that you use the same syntax as I do.

--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/
Jul 20 '05 #7

P: n/a
"Shaun Wolf Wortis" <so***@no-email.invalid> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:so*************************@news.fas.harvard. edu...
Hi guys,

http://www.corinneschippert.com

css: http://www.corinneschippert.com/corinne.css

Site (XHTML-Strict; validates) works on Mozilla, Win IE 6, but does not
display properly on Mac IE 5.2. Cannot, for the life of me, figure out
what the problem is.

Any ideas?


You have absolute positioning and negative top values for your container
divs. With the absolute positioning you take them out of the code flow, also
out of the horizon div. Actually a browser who displays that the way you
want should be considered as broken, not Mac IE...

HTH
Markus
Jul 20 '05 #8

P: n/a
Shaun Wolf Wortis wrote:
Site (XHTML-Strict; validates) works on Mozilla, Win IE 6, but does not
display properly on Mac IE 5.2. Cannot, for the life of me, figure out
what the problem is.


I wouldn't worry about it too much, especially if it displays fine in
Safari. IE for MacOS is officially a dead (unmaintained) product.

--
Shawn K. Quinn
Jul 20 '05 #9

P: n/a
Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
I wouldn't worry about it too much, especially if it displays fine in
Safari. IE for MacOS is officially a dead (unmaintained) product.


....still used in offices where there are Macs. The upgrade from IE/Mac
to Safari will likely take as long as the upgrade from e.g. IE 5/Win to
IE6. Or NN4 to, well, pretty much anything is an upgrade from that
thing. ;-)

--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/
Jul 20 '05 #10

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.