Firefox 2.0

[blueerica]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

Not really: he's a terrible kisser. Don't ask me how I know.

That can be fixed, you know.

[Snowflake]

Okay, so far I love Firefox. I did notice one thing, and this happens with LoT as well as my own website. On LoT, the quotes when I check in to the site do not wrap but the text goes right off the screen.

On my website (for those of you on Firefox now, www.rudolph-valentino.com), my upper navigation bar does not wrap either within the table, but the menu option scroll off the screen.

My question is this, is there a setting I need to configure in Firefox to view or is there something I need to add to the coding in my site so that the menu will wrap. I am assuming if it shows up this way for me, it's the same for everyone.

Or maybe I need to adjust my screen resolution? It's 1024xwhatever right now.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Snowflake

My question is this, is there a setting I need to configure in Firefox to view or is there something I need to add to the coding in my site so that the menu will wrap. I am assuming if it shows up this way for me, it's the same for everyone.

Or maybe I need to adjust my screen resolution? It's 1024xwhatever right now.

The short answer is, it's a matter of differences between how IE interprets HTML vs. how FF interprets it. It would take a re-work of the coding to resolve that.

The longer answer includes, wtf? If anything, I'd have expected IE to be the one where you see problems with the quotes. Ever since the last upgrade of the quotes system, the IE formatting has been kinda heinous and I've been furiously trying to resolve that. That's the first I've heard of it looking bad on FireFox. Dang.

[Alex]

Snowflake:

I don't have any problems with the quotes and I'm on FF2.0. I tried to look at your Web site to see if I found any coding issues (I do get the same unwrapped nav section), but am really curious how you got that page developed.

Did you do it yourself or someone else? If yourself, did you use some weird software to do it?

Your site appears to have been coded by someone extremely worried that their code will be plagiarized and so made it difficult to view code. First, right click is disabled and your HTML was first translated into unicode character codes and then uses javascript to decode it back into usable HTML.

This first has the effect of rendering your page completely unviewable to anybody with javascript disabled. It also makes any code tweaking difficult.

Just to demonstrate, if you do a view source on your home page, this is how all the code and text is represented:

%3C%53%43%52%49%50%54%20%4C%41%4E%47%55%41%47%45%3 D%22...

But I did translate it back to see the code that renders and there are some oddities.

First, you have this little bit of code:

<style Media="Print" type="text/css">
body {display:none}
</style>

Essentially, what this does is prevents anybody from printing a page from your site. If they try, all they get is a header and a blank page. Not sure what reason there would be for doing that.

Then there's this:

<meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 5.0">

Whoever did this used MS Front Page, one of the most godawful WYSIWIG HTML generators on god's green earth. If you're using it, I strongly recommend finding one of the many alternatives. However, on its own by default even FrontPage does not do the encoding I'm seeing here.

I'm not immediately seeing why the navigation links wrap in IE but not Firefox, but one thing to note is that a "feature" of IE has always been that it is somewhat forgiving of incorrect code that then breaks when put through a different browser that tries to enforce standards.

[Snowflake]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Snowflake:

I don't have any problems with the quotes and I'm on FF2.0. I tried to look at your Web site to see if I found any coding issues (I do get the same unwrapped nav section), but am really curious how you got that page developed.

Did you do it yourself or someone else? If yourself, did you use some weird software to do it?

Hi Alex

to answer some questions further on, yes, I use FP to do my site (after years of hard coding, I gave it up) and went with a template.

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Your site appears to have been coded by someone extremely worried that their code will be plagiarized and so made it difficult to view code. First, right click is disabled and your HTML was first translated into unicode character codes and then uses javascript to decode it back into usable HTML.

I encrypted my site simply because some clown right clicked my entire site and began selling photo Cds on ebay (this was before I was using low-res images and such), but because of the writing I am doing now, I decided it was easier to just encrypt the whole site and avoid the issue entirely. I know it is not 100%, but it has prevented stuff I consider proprietary from showing up all over the place, as it was doing with my old site.

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Whoever did this used MS Front Page, one of the most godawful WYSIWIG HTML generators on god's green earth. If you're using it, I strongly recommend finding one of the many alternatives. However, on its own by default even FrontPage does not do the encoding I'm seeing here.

I'm not immediately seeing why the navigation links wrap in IE but not Firefox, but one thing to note is that a "feature" of IE has always been that it is somewhat forgiving of incorrect code that then breaks when put through a different browser that tries to enforce standards.

So, the template I am using was designed for FP, I went with it because it works in similar fashion to all other MS products (and I am a simpleton, if I can work on word, I can work in FP, if you get my drift) not that I am unwilling or unable to use another program. At this point, I don't know that I will willing to make the switch and go through a redesign again. That said, I'm open to suggestions

[Alex]

I'd never seen the unicode trick used for an entire site before (but it used to be a good way to hide email addresses from bots) but there are so many tools out there for re-enabling right-click that my recommendation would be that this is probably more trouble than it is worth and also completely blocks non-javascript users (according to our workplace stats, about 3% of surfers do so with javascript turned off). And more importantly, it will block many search engine crawlers since they frequently ignore javascript (Google seems to have you indexed, though).

Is there a reason for disabling printing of your pages by hiding the body in a print stylesheet?

My recommendation would be to re-enable that stuff and watermark your photos and images. This will ease traffic to your site (while your text is indexed at Google, it seems your images are not) and make even theft a form of advertising (and theft will happen anyway if someone really wants to and it doesn't even require going around your code, all the photos are in their cache.


I haven't done it yet but you might want to run your HTML and CSS through the W3C HTML and CSS validators to see if there are any big errors (though it will generally only find syntactical errors these are the cause of a lot of display disparities between IE and Mozilla browsers).

As for other products, if you're willing to pay, Dreamweaver is much superior to FrontPage though still not great. No WYSIWYG editor is great. There are a lot of freeware and shareware editors out there but I'm not really familiar with any of them since it has been so long since I worked somewhere that allows deverlopers to do anything other than hand coding and I am most comfortable doing that as well (I use HomeSite, which is not WYSIWYG).

By the way, another obvious coding problem is that you have your initial javascript declarations before the <head> section of the page. Browsers are generally smart enough to work with that, but it could cause problems (and will throw errors if you run the validators).

[Snowflake]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

I'd never seen the unicode trick used for an entire site before (but it used to be a good way to hide email addresses from bots) but there are so many tools out there for re-enabling right-click that my recommendation would be that this is probably more trouble than it is worth and also completely blocks non-javascript users (according to our workplace stats, about 3% of surfers do so with javascript turned off). And more importantly, it will block many search engine crawlers since they frequently ignore javascript (Google seems to have you indexed, though).

I use webcryptpro, I can enable and disable exactly what I am encrypting. So I will do that next time I update. as you suggest below.

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

My recommendation would be to re-enable that stuff and watermark your photos and images. This will ease traffic to your site (while your text is indexed at Google, it seems your images are not) and make even theft a form of advertising (and theft will happen anyway if someone really wants to and it doesn't even require going around your code, all the photos are in their cache.

A good idea, since all my new images are not up yet, this might be the best and easier route.

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

I haven't done it yet but you might want to run your HTML and CSS through the W3C HTML and CSS validators to see if there are any big errors (though it will generally only find syntactical errors these are the cause of a lot of display disparities between IE and Mozilla browsers).

A very capital suggestion! I will investigate this and do this, I'm all for having correct and readable code (of course you should have seen the horrible mess my hand/hard coded site was, UGH)

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

As for other products, if you're willing to pay, Dreamweaver is much superior to FrontPage though still not great. No WYSIWYG editor is great.

Not that money is an object and I have no problem paying for software, I'll have to look into it to see what I can come up with that will work for me.

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

By the way, another obvious coding problem is that you have your initial javascript declarations before the <head> section of the page. Browsers are generally smart enough to work with that, but it could cause problems (and will throw errors if you run the validators).

Hmm, I will look at that as well. Not sure if the original template is formatted this way or I stuck soemthing in the wrong place (the second is the more likely scenario)

Thanks for your wise consul and good advice!

Now, back to Firefox!

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Snowflake

Okay, so far I love Firefox. I did notice one thing, and this happens with LoT as well as my own website. On LoT, the quotes when I check in to the site do not wrap but the text goes right off the screen.

Hey, that's been happening to me too lately - is there a Firefox setting to fix that or is it LoT?

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

Hey, that's been happening to me too lately - is there a Firefox setting to fix that or is it LoT?

Gack. This really throws me for a loop. Like I said I've been fighting with the layout of the quotes for a while, but Firefox has always been formatted right for me, it's IE that gets out of whack. Hmmm...

[Ghoulish Delight]

BTW, is it just the quotes that you lose off the right side of the screen, or is it the whole page? Because I've seen that before in FireFox, where I'll have minimized or something and when I come back, all of a sudden everything's extending off the right side of the screen. That seems to be a FireFox bug, and I saw it in the 1.x version. Exiting FireFox and launching again resolves it.