Log in

View Full Version : Css Problem


abiodunmi
10-21-2006, 03:49 PM
My links to external sites works in FF and older IE but the moment i upgraded to IE 7 the links overlap one another.I have used <br/> all to no avail as the links stays on one another.It still works fine in FF.

Pls help me.
the-disturbed
10-21-2006, 06:34 PM
its <br> not <br/> dunno if that was a typo or not?

code?
jscheuer1
10-31-2006, 05:57 AM
If you had some hacks to compensate for the differences between IE 6 and FF and they are being picked up in whole or in part by IE 7 this could be the problem as IE 7 is supposed to be more like FF in its rendering engine.
djr33
10-31-2006, 06:16 AM
disturbed, that's not an error. That's xml. single tags, those without close tags like (<br> etc. not <a></a> etc.), need to be self closing for xml to validate. Generally doesn't hurt anything when just using html, though there's no reason for it if you're not using xml (which you should rarely be).
mwinter
11-01-2006, 05:31 PM
its <br> not <br/> ...

disturbed, that's not an error. That's xml.

More accurately, it's XHTML (an application of XML).



single tags, those without close tags like (<br> etc. not <a></a> etc.), need to be self closing for xml to validate.

You're referring to elements with no content. For Appendix C XHTML 1.0, all elements with an EMPTY content model should be written that way. Any other element should have an end-tag.

In real XHTML, any empty element can be written with either an end-tag, or an empty-element start-tag. That is, <br/> and <br></br> are interchangeable.



Generally doesn't hurt anything when just using html, though there's no reason for it if you're not using xml (which you should rarely be).

One can use XML as much as one would like. The issue is serving XHTML to the general public, and that should be avoided.

Mike
jscheuer1
11-02-2006, 06:17 AM
One can use XML as much as one would like. The issue is serving XHTML to the general public, and that should be avoided.

Mike

That's touching on something that recently came up in a discussion with an old friend I've been helping with layout. I said not to use the XHTML DOCTYPE or the xml thing, (don't know the precise name for it) in the opening <html> tag because the code wasn't even valid XHTML to begin with. She countered with 'The forum package generates xml and rss' which I was a little surprised to hear so I reconsidered.

Her page's source does have a number of things in it like:


<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<rdf:Description
rdf:about="http://www.rosary.org/2006/10/heavenly_soup.html"
trackback:ping="http://www.scarlettpumpernickel.com/cgi-bin/tara/mt-tb.cgi/24"
dc:title="Heavenly Soup"
dc:identifier="http://www.rosary.org/2006/10/heavenly_soup.html"
dc:subject=""
dc:description="They say the devil&apos;s in the details. Well, Heaven is in the details, too. Sometimes we obsess over the big things in life, when often it&apos;s the little things that make a difference in the quality of our lives. That&apos;s..."
dc:creator="Joyce."
dc:date="2006-10-26T16:57:39-05:00" />
</rdf:RDF>

Does this kind of thing require any special DOCTYPE or xml information in the opening <html> tag to be effective?

We are currently using this:


<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>

In Opera and FF there is a little icon in the far right of the address bar (nothing in IE 6) offering a live bookmark in FF and a choice of rss 2.0 or ATOM in Opera so, I guess it is working with that DOCTYPE and <html> tag. I'm just concerned that perhaps the rss is working (it is in Opera, it generated a feed named for the domain with all of the content separated into articles), but that she is missing out on something in the xml department.
mwinter
11-02-2006, 04:33 PM
I said not to use the XHTML DOCTYPE or the xml thing, (don't know the precise name for it) in the opening <html> tag because the code wasn't even valid XHTML to begin with.

XML documents start with a prologue (prolog, in the grammar), followed by the root element. The prologue consists of the XML declaration and the document type declaration. The prologue can be omitted and documents may still be well-formed, but the document type is required for validity.

The XML declaration is a processing instruction with the target 'xml' (<?xml ... ?>), specifying the XML version, document encoding, and standalone declaration. It's best avoided in XHTML served as HTML as it will throw IE into "Quirks" mode.



She countered with 'The forum package generates xml and rss' which I was a little surprised to hear so I reconsidered.

Which forum? Her's?



Her page's source does have a number of things in it like:


<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<rdf:Description
rdf:about="http://www.rosary.org/2006/10/heavenly_soup.html"
trackback:ping="http://www.scarlettpumpernickel.com/cgi-bin/tara/mt-tb.cgi/24"
dc:title="Heavenly Soup"
dc:identifier="http://www.rosary.org/2006/10/heavenly_soup.html"
dc:subject=""
dc:description="They say the devil&apos;s in the details. Well, Heaven is in the details, too. Sometimes we obsess over the big things in life, when often it&apos;s the little things that make a difference in the quality of our lives. That&apos;s..."
dc:creator="Joyce."
dc:date="2006-10-26T16:57:39-05:00" />
</rdf:RDF>
Does this kind of thing require any special DOCTYPE or xml information in the opening <html> tag to be effective?

I noticed that commented out in the markup for that document, and as such, it should be ignored.

I know little about RSS, but as I understand it, a feed is never supposed to be embedded within a document. Instead, it's referenced via an anchor or link element. An aggregator, or some other processor, can then identify the feed by MIME type (application/rss+xml) or the RDF root element. Just before the title element, the RSS 2.0 and Atom feeds are referenced in this way.


I took a quick look at the RSS feed, and according to the RSS 2.0 specification (as I understand it), the feed is invalid: the description element cannot contain literal markup outside a CDATA section (http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss#hrelementsOfLtitemgt) (see also the link to entity-encoded examples (http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/encodingDescriptions)). The same may also apply to Atom feeds.

Mike
jscheuer1
11-02-2006, 07:11 PM
I did a little more testing, and that coupled with what I had done in conjunction with my previous post here indicates that the rss 2.0 is working and that the FF 'live bookmark' is working as well. I didn't bother testing the ATOM thing. The fact that it is commented out (I noticed that too) probably just makes it so that it can be ignored by agents that don't support it. These sections in the document appear to me to be references of some sort, they certainly do not contain the entire text of the individual articles. That coupled with stuff like this:


<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">

leads me to think that it truly is just being worked out by the 'package', validly or otherwise. I mean, no one put that code on the page, it was generated by a program, the forum package, in this case being used to create a blog.

My main concern was that there might be other features unable to function - hard to check for something that isn't there, especially if you don't know what you are looking for. I've asked her (Joyce) about this as well, if she were aware of anything that wasn't working as expected, have yet to hear back but, she did see your post and appreciates your help.

Thanks again, Mike.
mwinter
11-03-2006, 02:20 AM
The fact that it is commented out (I noticed that too) probably just makes it so that it can be ignored by agents that don't support it.

I meant that it should be ignored entirely. Certainly it's ignored here in both Opera and Firefox, though that doesn't necessarily mean that specialised software would do the same. The RSS (http://www.rosary.org/index.xml) and Atom (http://www.rosary.org/atom.xml) feeds are referenced earlier in the document via link elements.



These sections in the document appear to me to be references of some sort, they certainly do not contain the entire text of the individual articles.

As I see it, that's all RSS is, really: links to information, especially recently published material. Essentially, a way of advertising updates and content from a site to anyone that cares to receive that information.



That coupled with stuff like this:


<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">

leads me to think that it truly is just being worked out by the 'package', validly or otherwise. I mean, no one put that code on the page, it was generated by a program, the forum package, in this case being used to create a blog.

Oh, sure. I can't imagine why a content management system couldn't automatically update an RSS feed as it goes about updating the site itself.

I am a little curious about what this inserted content is, though. It seems to be RDF with the Dublin Core metadata element set, which is separate to both the RSS 2.0 and Atom feeds (though Dublin Core can apparently be used as a RSS 1.0 module). It seems a little iffy to me, but as I wrote earlier, I am wading into this a little blindly.

Mike