Morning All

I have a Firefox layout problem, which is proving very diffiicult to solve,
and any help would be much appreciated!

If you look at this page http://www.market-monitor.co.uk/ in Firefox and then
in IE7 you will see that the black footer is appearing different, with the text
positioned correctly in IE, but in Firefox it is moving the text away from the
black background.

Can someone please help to find out how i can solve it!

Thanks

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:04:31 +0000 (UTC), "Ads901"
<webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote:

>Morning All
>
> I have a Firefox layout problem, which is proving very diffiicult to solve,
>and any help would be much appreciated!
>
> If you look at this page http://www.market-monitor.co.uk/ in Firefox and then
>in IE7 you will see that the black footer is appearing different, with the text
>positioned correctly in IE, but in Firefox it is moving the text away from the
>black background.
>
> Can someone please help to find out how i can solve it!
>
> Thanks


You still have a validation issue

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...up=0&verbose=1


<link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico"/>

?

The sequence <FOO /> can be interpreted in at least two different
ways, depending on the DOCTYPE of the document. For HMTL 4.01 Strict,
the '/' terminates the tag <FOO (with an implied '>'). However, since
many browsers don't interpret it this way, even in the presence of an
HMTL 4.01 Strict DOCTYPE, it is best to avoid it completely in pure
HTML documents and reserve its use solely for those written in XHTML.

remove the backslash.
revalidate and most of the following apparent errors may have
disappeared.

or just change the code to xhtml with Dw's File | Convert :-)) - but
don't let Micha see it :-))
--

~Malcolm~*...
~*

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:04:31 +0000 (UTC), "Ads901"
<webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote:

>Morning All
>
> I have a Firefox layout problem, which is proving very diffiicult to solve,
>and any help would be much appreciated!
>
> If you look at this page http://www.market-monitor.co.uk/ in Firefox and then
>in IE7 you will see that the black footer is appearing different, with the text
>positioned correctly in IE, but in Firefox it is moving the text away from the
>black background.
>
> Can someone please help to find out how i can solve it!
>
> Thanks

Oh and also - the problem when viewed with IE6 is still there.

the main content is still below both left and right divs, probably
caused by the vertical line of right if the "left" div being about
15px further right than in IE7 and FF etc.

--

~Malcolm~*...
~*

Yeah i have tried to reduce the sizing in the main content area - but obviously it still isnt working!

Will the validation error sort out the problem in Firefox then?

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:35:17 +0000 (UTC), "Ads901"
<webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote:

>Yeah i have tried to reduce the sizing in the main content area - but obviously it still isnt working!
>
>Will the validation error sort out the problem in Firefox then?

well - FF is stricter than IE, ( good thing in my view as it makes you
get the code right :-)

why not just try it ?

The way I do it - is check validation, and work my way down the list
one at a time ( unless I see an obvious problem ) reload to server and
revalidate. The W3C validation tool isn't perfect and if theres a
problem at top of file, it often can't sort out valid code further
down.

I'll look at box with phone number again
--

~Malcolm~*...
~*

Thanks Malcolm I really appreciate your help.

The isue I have with the validation is that it is saying that it is saying
that the 'LINK' and 'STYLE' elements are not supported - and that the closing
'>' is the problem. If I remove the arrow then the code doesnt work - so the
way i see it is that the only option i have is to change the Doc Type to XHTML
- would you agree?

> The sequence <FOO /> can be interpreted in at least two different
> ways, depending on the DOCTYPE of the document. For HMTL 4.01 Strict,
> the '/' terminates the tag <FOO (with an implied '>').

<FOO /> is strictly XHTML tag syntax. It does not belong, and will not
validate in a page with an HTML doctype.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
==================


"Malcolm _" <malcom@mon.org> wrote in message
news:uuvd84pigm8lbstc5v1f28h3tgnmdn2lef@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:04:31 +0000 (UTC), "Ads901"
> <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote:
>
>>Morning All
>>
>> I have a Firefox layout problem, which is proving very diffiicult to
>> solve,
>>and any help would be much appreciated!
>>
>> If you look at this page http://www.market-monitor.co.uk/ in Firefox and
>> then
>>in IE7 you will see that the black footer is appearing different, with the
>>text
>>positioned correctly in IE, but in Firefox it is moving the text away from
>>the
>>black background.
>>
>> Can someone please help to find out how i can solve it!
>>
>> Thanks
>
>
> You still have a validation issue
>
> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...up=0&verbose=1
>
>
> <link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico"/>
>
> ?
>
> The sequence <FOO /> can be interpreted in at least two different
> ways, depending on the DOCTYPE of the document. For HMTL 4.01 Strict,
> the '/' terminates the tag <FOO (with an implied '>'). However, since
> many browsers don't interpret it this way, even in the presence of an
> HMTL 4.01 Strict DOCTYPE, it is best to avoid it completely in pure
> HTML documents and reserve its use solely for those written in XHTML.
>
> remove the backslash.
> revalidate and most of the following apparent errors may have
> disappeared.
>
> or just change the code to xhtml with Dw's File | Convert :-)) - but
> don't let Micha see it :-))
> --
>
> ~Malcolm~*...
> ~*

.oO(Murray *ACE*)

>> The sequence <FOO /> can be interpreted in at least two different
>> ways, depending on the DOCTYPE of the document. For HMTL 4.01 Strict,
>> the '/' terminates the tag <FOO (with an implied '>').
>
><FOO /> is strictly XHTML tag syntax. It does not belong, and will not
>validate in a page with an HTML doctype.

Depends on where it's used. In HTML <FOO /> is equivalent to <FOO>> - a
tag followed by a literal ">"! Almost no browser interprets it that way,
but so are the SGML rules.

If you use such a tag in the head of an HTML document, the validator
will complain, because the 'head' element doesn't allow character data.
But if you use it somewhere in the body, the validator will accept it
(with the warning posted by Malcom).

Micha

.oO(Ads901)

>Thanks Malcolm I really appreciate your help.
>
> The isue I have with the validation is that it is saying that it is saying
>that the 'LINK' and 'STYLE' elements are not supported - and that the closing
>'>' is the problem. If I remove the arrow then the code doesnt work - so the
>way i see it is that the only option i have is to change the Doc Type to XHTML
>- would you agree?

No. Just remove the trailing slash from the first link tag as already
suggested and most of the errors will vanish. The error messages might
be confusing, but from the parser's point of view they're correct.

In HTML the "/" terminates the link tag, the following ">" is seen as
character data, which is not allowed in the document head. This causes
the 'head' element to be closed implicitly, so all following 'link' and
'style' elements are already seen as part of the body. That's why you
get such weird looking error messages, even though they're accurate.

Micha

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 07:14:21 -0400, "Murray *ACE*"
<forums@HAHAgreat-web-sights.com> wrote:

>> The sequence <FOO /> can be interpreted in at least two different
>> ways, depending on the DOCTYPE of the document. For HMTL 4.01 Strict,
>> the '/' terminates the tag <FOO (with an implied '>').
>
><FOO /> is strictly XHTML tag syntax. It does not belong, and will not
>validate in a page with an HTML doctype.

I was quoting the exact words of the validator - sorry I missed the
quotation marks.

But I'm glad I got it correct as you and Micha have confirmed :-)
--

~Malcolm~*...
~*