The browser of choice

[R.Daugherty]

The browser of choice

It wasn't an argument from him, it was an excellent description of the situation. We know you don't care. Some of us out here do. rd

[Guest.Visitor]

The browser of choice

Chuck Ackerman wrote: > I did in my original post. www.excelsystems.com > > There's a dark blue bar just below the BCD logo that has 3 areas: > Application Development, Business Intelligence, and Utilities. In > I.E. when you hover over any one of those words a sub-menu appears in > the grey bar below them. In Firefox, when I hover over them nothing > appears in the grey bar below those words. > > Since Firefox broke the integrity of the site I have not trust that > it can render a site properly. In fact, Firefox didn't notify me > that it couldn't do the job, it just ignored the things it couldn't > do. I can't trust a product that does that. > > Why Firefox doesn't do it doesn't matter. I just want the site to > work. I don't want to hear that Excelsystems is using some "off the > wall" bug that only I.E. renders properly. The guys at Excelsystems > are too smart for that. I believe that Mozilla has an immature > product. I think that you may be reading too much into the difference. Why couldn't the difference be attributed to them specifically coding features for IE knowing that a FF user can't/won't see it? To me, I would use a site like NewEgg.com as an example much like yours but where FF works properly. In FF when I put my cursor over the major category labels on the left it shoots out the subcategories to the right -- just as IE does. The difference is likely because the NewEgg designers were capable of coding for both. To say Mozilla is an immature product is ludicrous, Mozilla was available long before IE. Bill

[Guest.Visitor]

The browser of choice

Bill said: "To say Mozilla is an immature product is ludicrous, Mozilla was available long before IE." My reference to maturity didn't have anything to do with the age of the product, just it's behavior. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

[bharder@nlrha.ab.ca]

The browser of choice

I can sympathize with your argument to a limited, a very limited degree. The choice of browser by businesses and consumers is a practical matter, and they often have little direct input to direct nature of the choices available to them. However I must say I consider this to be simplistic. The Internet, and the World Wide Web built upon it, is the ultimate Client Server application. The reason it doesn't have most of the problems that most Client Server applications have is standards. Good ones, that address a wide array of concerns. The standards are well documented, implemented through an open and structured RFC process. They address issues of backwards compatibility. They consider, seriously, whether a given solution is in fact the best answer to a given problem. And no, the process isn't driven by the market leader. Microsoft gets their say, but so does everybody else. As Doc Searls and David Weinberger say (www.worldofends.com), "The Internet isn't a thing. It's an agreement." I would also add that, as important as business on the Internet has become, the Internet is more than the business community too. Those standards are the foundation of the system. They are what make the system so valuable. They allow innovation. It's not proper for you to disparage this as a remote process irrelevant to you and the rest of this forum. In fact, the United States generally, and California and Massachusetts in particular, has been a hotbed of Internet standards related activities since the establishment of the Internet. It's like saying that standards are irrelevant to the phone system. No, it's not irrelevant. The more systems adhere to the standards, the more useful the whole system becomes. The answer is to get ALL of the browsers more standards compliant. Don't ignore the bugs/problems, report them! Once you've done that, you've done what you can. It's also a practical response to the issues at hand.

[nandelin]

The browser of choice

Since Firefox broke the integrity of the site I have not trust that it can render a site properly. In fact, Firefox didn't notify me that it couldn't do the job, it just ignored the things it couldn't do.

I don't understand the logic of expecting a browser to adhere to the specifications of a site. Rather, I expect sites to adhere to the specifications of a browser. For example, the following CSS class works in Firefox but not Internet Explorer: td.rt:hover { font-weight: bolder; empty-cells:show; margin-bottom: 10; margin-left: 10; margin-right: 10; margin-top: 10; } If I use the above code in a style sheet, should I complain that Internet Explorer doesn't support it, or expect Internet Explorer to notify users that it can't render it properly, or should I code my site to support the capabilities of Internet Explorer? Personally, I tend to limit my code to what is supported by both Firefox and Internet Explorer. Both browsers are so close now that it shouldn't be a burden to site developers. Code supporting keyboard events may be an exception. I.E. offers better support for keyboard events. Nathan Andelin

[Guest.Visitor]

The browser of choice

Nathan, I understand your argument. But I think that maybe you didn't understand my point. In your example the owner of the site that doesn't work properly in I.E. will fix it pronto. Why? Because he, and 90% of his users, are using I.E. and they'll notice the mistake. OTOH, if his site doesn't work properly in Firefox he may never know. Clearly this is the scenario in BCD's case. I presume they'd fix their site if they knew it wasn't working in Firefox. But yet they haven't because they probably don't know. Many website designers don't test for FireFox for many reasons. 1) It's a small minority of their users, 2) They don't even know the differences, 3) etc. I'm not arguing the merits of which browser adheres to the standards better. I'm not arguing the merits of web designers that don't test their site under Firefox. I'm not arguing which browser is safer to use. The only thing I care about is results. In the browser. WHY the results aren't correct is unimportant. I know that I'll have better results in I.E. Actually, I prefer Firefox. But, alas, I don't feel comfortable using it. I know, for a fact, that I'll get incorrect rendering while using it. Hey, if incorrect rendering is ok with you, then so be it. Use Firefox. I'm not trying to convert anyone to a religion, only trying to point out the pitfalls. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer. "nandelin15" wrote in message news:6b34235a.34@WebX.WawyahGHajS... > > > Since Firefox broke the integrity of the site I have not trust that > it > can render a site properly. In fact, Firefox didn't notify me that it > couldn't do the job, it just ignored the things it couldn't do. > > > > > I don't understand the logic of expecting a browser to adhere to the > specifications of a site. Rather, I expect sites to adhere to the > specifications of a browser. For example, the following CSS class works in > Firefox but not Internet Explorer: > > td.rt:hover { > font-weight: bolder; > empty-cells:show; > margin-bottom: 10; > margin-left: 10; > margin-right: 10; > margin-top: 10; > } > > If I use the above code in a style sheet, should I complain that Internet > Explorer doesn't support it, or expect Internet Explorer to notify users > that it can't render it properly, or should I code my site to support the > capabilities of Internet Explorer? > > Personally, I tend to limit my code to what is supported by both Firefox > and Internet Explorer. Both browsers are so close now that it shouldn't be > a burden to site developers. Code supporting keyboard events may be an > exception. I.E. offers better support for keyboard events. > > Nathan Andelin

[nandelin]

The browser of choice

Chuck, It doesn't matter to me that Firefox has a smaller market share. Many of my customers use Macintosh workstations and IE for the Mac is not up to date, or up to anyone's standards. It's inconsistent with I.E. for Windows. It's very likely that the BCD site wouldn't support it. Years ago I struggled a lot with inconsistencies between browsers. Firefox and IE are so similar now that I only occasionally run into differences that matter. One great thing about Firefox is the consistency between Windows, Mac, and Linux versions. There isn't even a version of IE for Linux. I test HTML/CSS/JavaScript in Firefox first, normally. Then try it in I.E. If BCD and other sites ignore Firefox, Mac, and Linux clients, that's their business, but if someone were to make them aware of the problem, I think they'd fix it. Firefox doesn't provide good support for Function keys, so if you're in the business of converting display file DDS to HTML/CSS/JavaScript, then I understand the need for I.E. My biggest complaint about ALL browsers is the inability to adjust printer settings via script. HTML/CSS would be a good alternative to PDF if that were fixed. Nathan.

[nandelin]

The browser of choice

give me the code on a Gecko browser that will allow me to emulate an "uppercase only" field

See CCS Style for an uppercase transformation:

---

Code

[nandelin]

The browser of choice

We often create web pages, without frames, where we hold the column titles fixed and scroll the data. Doesn't work in Firefox.

Just create a scrollable area below your column headings as shown in the code window below. Any content within the "div" will scroll.

---

Code

[J.Pluta]

The browser of choice

I do believe this is only an appearance, Nathan. The value actually returned to the program is in the case the user types. Joe

[Guest.Visitor]

The browser of choice

Nathan, I with you on Firefox. I like the program, I like their efforts. I just can't use it. It's like someone that has lied to me. I can't trust them anymore. Firefox has lied to me. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer. "nandelin15" wrote in message news:6b34235a.36@WebX.WawyahGHajS... > Chuck, > > It doesn't matter to me that Firefox has a smaller market share. Many of > my customers use Macintosh workstations and IE for the Mac is not up to > date, or up to anyone's standards. It's inconsistent with I.E. for > Windows. It's very likely that the BCD site wouldn't support it. > > Years ago I struggled a lot with inconsistencies between browsers. Firefox > and IE are so similar now that I only occasionally run into differences > that matter. > > One great thing about Firefox is the consistency between Windows, Mac, and > Linux versions. There isn't even a version of IE for Linux. > > I test HTML/CSS/JavaScript in Firefox first, normally. Then try it in I.E. > > If BCD and other sites ignore Firefox, Mac, and Linux clients, that's > their business, but if someone were to make them aware of the problem, I > think they'd fix it. > > Firefox doesn't provide good support for Function keys, so if you're in > the business of converting display file DDS to HTML/CSS/JavaScript, then I > understand the need for I.E. > > My biggest complaint about ALL browsers is the inability to adjust printer > settings via script. HTML/CSS would be a good alternative to PDF if that > were fixed. > > Nathan.

[nandelin]

The browser of choice

Joe, You're right about the style only being an appearance. If a value needs to be stored in the database as uppercase, I normally apply that rule with server code after the value has been submitted. Another alternative is to use the string.toUpperCase() method in JavaScript at the moment the form is submitted by the browser.

[nandelin]

The browser of choice

I can't trust them anymore. Firefox has lied to me.

I'm not sure I follow your logic, but if it comes to a question of credibility, I think Microsoft lied about "innovation" being the driving motivation behind embedding I.E. deep into the bowels the operating system, when their real motivation was to eliminate Netscape as a competitor. Ironically that became one of their worst decisions from a design standpoint. Now when someone discovers an I.E. exploit, they've discovered an operating system exploit.

[J.Pluta]

The browser of choice

Neither of which does what I want, which is to simply allow the user to type lower case into a field and return it to the calling program as upper case. The combination of text-transform and toUpperCase will emulate the behavior pretty closely, but won't do more complex edits such as numeric only. My point is that you can't change a keystroke on the fly as you can in IE. That's because the DOM in Gecko is less functional than the DOM in IE. All the major functionality differences between Gecko and IE lay in the DOM. Joe

[nandelin]

The browser of choice

I expressed a concern earlier about I.E. supporting keyboard events better than Firefox. Maybe Firefox has changed, or maybe I just understand the DOM better now, but I now see that my earlier concern was unfounded. One of my concerns was how to disable the default behavior associated with Function Keys. You might want F1 to show a help page for your application rather than the default help for Firefox, for example. It turns out that: e.cancelBubble; return false; will do the trick. I've included a code sample for an HTML form that traps keyboard events. Perhaps it will help someone.

---

Code