Someone should make a firefox add on that gives my browser angry eyebrows whenever a site is not functioning correctly.

The web site looks like a nightmare on chrome and firefox, and print preview on both looks even worse. I'd describe it as: Text boxes in a blender.





It is sad how many people forget the job that HTML and CSS were meant for.

It is a markup language meant to provide general rules that suggest how content should be rendered.

You have no idea what the rendering device will actually be. You don't know if they're viewing it on a cell phone at QVGA resolution, or a wide screen monitor, or a printed page. All the stupid tricks (including those done by this site's redesign) are guaranteed to break on various browsers and in various modes. You have no assurance to the fonts being used, the actual pixel sizes, the actual and preferred widths and heights the user wants to see, how much the display may be scaled, if the scripts will be run, or if any particular CSS rule will be disabled or overridden by the user.

You have a link to the W3c validation tool, but your choice of validation is odd. You specify the decade old transitional version. It was designed only to be used during a transition for browsers circa 1997. Much has changed since then.

Running the site through the more current validation shows errors both for html validation and for css validation.

The site looks so bad in Chrome that I don't even know what to tell you.

OMGWTF?!?

Well, that's one way to put it.



You have a grey box of infinite height on a small yellow background. The first paragraph of text doesn't start until like 32059845^34 pixels down the page. All the other elements look like they were placed randomly as even the outer ad columns aren't lined up. The entire site is justified to the left for some reason too.

As for Color theory, bright yellow isn't the color you want to be splashing in people's faces when you want them to be reading for long periods of time. Whatever color you choose, tone if down (darken and desaturate), and make sure the main body of your site is what stands out.

It most definitly looks fucked up in firefox 3.6 on Vista , the fact that its a HTML/CSS tutorial site makes it quite hilarious

Alright, it seems that most newer browsers are showing my site close to the way I want it now. Some are still messed up, but I guess you can't please them all. Most of my problems were related to dimensions, overflow, and the fact that adding padding to a div actually increases it's size. Most of these issues are fixed. I still have some more things to change to improve the overall appearance, but at least it's legible. Ha!

Thanks all.

Alright, it seems that most newer browsers are showing my site close to the way I want it now. Some are still messed up, but I guess you can't please them all.

That's a really pitiful way to look at web development.

You have forgotten that user agents are able to render it however they want. They are perfectly at liberty to follow your suggested rules, or discard your suggested rules. You can make no assumptions about layout, or that any layout rule will be followed, or that any script controlling layout will be followed. Simply put: You are doing it wrong.

It is your mistake to try to force HTML and CSS into a specific fixed style. No matter how hard you try, you will never succeed at that goal. It is contrary to the very design of HTML and CSS. The web was never designed to be WYSIWYG, and the standards explicitly state this fact. It is not a fixed medium. To the contrary, the web was designed to allow full flexibility to the user.

[quote name='BKnight' timestamp='1297934764' post='4775341']
Alright, it seems that most newer browsers are showing my site close to the way I want it now. Some are still messed up, but I guess you can't please them all.

That's a really pitiful way to look at web development.

You have forgotten that user agents are able to render it however they want. They are perfectly at liberty to follow your suggested rules, or discard your suggested rules. You can make no assumptions about layout, or that any layout rule will be followed, or that any script controlling layout will be followed. Simply put: You are doing it wrong.

It is your mistake to try to force HTML and CSS into a specific fixed style. No matter how hard you try, you will never succeed at that goal. It is contrary to the very design of HTML and CSS. The web was never designed to be WYSIWYG, and the standards explicitly state this fact. It is not a fixed medium. To the contrary, the web was designed to allow full flexibility to the user.
[/quote]

I did say that I still had more changes/corrections to make. I wasn't trying to say, "oh well, good enough". I see how you may have thought that from from "Some are still messed up, but I guess you can't please them all.", but what I really meant to say was, I was making progress on working out my mistakes. And I guess I was wrong anyways. It looks like you can please all browsers when you do it right.

Since my last post when things were looking only somewhat better, I've completely redone my css and page files (leaving content of course), and now it seems that all (or almost all) browsers are getting along with my site.

Self-taught-tip: Just because it looks good when you refresh it in your browser doesn't make it right.

works just fine for me... win7x64 + firefox 3.6.13