If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
"Scott Bryce" wrote
| In fact, oddly enough, you're using conditional comments on your own | site: | | snipped a bunch of example HTML that does not appear on any site I have | built. Maybe you didn't build it. But you linked it on your homepage. It's this link: My Pacific Crest Trail Adventure http://trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=7422 I don't mean to pry, but you're taking the liberty of dismissing others as not knowing what they're doing, and you provided your URL. But it does appear that trailjournals is actually sort of a social site for posting personal accounts. So apparently you just joined them and then posted the link? I can see that the pages actually on your site are very simple, clean, and use little or no CSS. So you don't really need to adapt to different browsers. There's no actual formatting to get messed up. While I enjoy creative graphics, it's nice to see pages like yours that allow my default font choice to display. Nevertheless, if you look at the trailjournals code you can see an interesting example of a conditional comment. (And there's the slashdot example I gave. It's not hard to find conditional comment spaghetti code on commercial websites.) It's difficult to make a page that complex that will behave the same way in all browsers. So the authors are pulling in some kind of giveaway javascript package to do that. Unfortunately, that also means their page layout is held hostage to javascript because they used that shortcut instead of figuring out how to actually accommodate different browsers using HTML and CSS. So some IE versions will break without script. And the menus are broken without script. And the layout in general is a bit shaky, with some visual items overlapping others. Maybe it would look better if I enabled script. But I'm viewing it in Firefox and it's set to be HTML5. So I'm guessing they just used some kind of WYSIWYG editor and settled for rough edges. The point being, it's not wrong to write code to accommodate different browsers. It's just flexible. Unless you believe it's wrong to use graphical layout at all on a webpage. Your method is certainly clean, compatible, and lightweight. But it has it's limits. Once you start getting into more involved graphics and layout design -- once you go beyond what was possible in 1998 -- you really have to use CSS and deal with browser incompatibilities. The major non-IE browsers are surprisingly dependable (assuming one doesn't try to use "cutting edge" CSS and HTML too much), for the most part, but IE is different, and different versions of IE are different again. |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
On 08/01/2019 03:58, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
David B. wrote: On 07/01/2019 23:14, Jonathan N. Little wrote: David B. wrote: On 07/01/2019 19:13, Jonathan N. Little wrote: David B. wrote: http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154688659100 Which side do you use when the foil is shiny on both sides? Haha! :-D I'm sure you'll be aware that a computer and/or a SOHO router can be compromised and the user of same will usually have absolutely no inkling that this has occurred. How do you protect YOUR equipment, Jonathan? Server router. Does your protection 'work'? Yes. *Are you SURE*?Β* ;-) Yes. Must need PCI compliance scans and protocols. OK (I'm not sure about your 'English' in the last sentence) Typo s/need/meet/ That makes a WORLD of difference! :-) Also: https://www.google.com/search?q=PCI+Compliance Thank you. I understand. I'm disappointed that you didn't respond to my last question. -- David B. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
On 08/01/2019 04:00, Mayayana wrote:
"Scott Bryce" wrote | In fact, oddly enough, you're using conditional comments on your own | site: | | snipped a bunch of example HTML that does not appear on any site I have | built. Maybe you didn't build it. But you linked it on your homepage. It's this link: My Pacific Crest Trail Adventure http://trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=7422 I don't mean to pry, but you're taking the liberty of dismissing others as not knowing what they're doing, and you provided your URL. But it does appear that trailjournals is actually sort of a social site for posting personal accounts. So apparently you just joined them and then posted the link? I can see that the pages actually on your site are very simple, clean, and use little or no CSS. So you don't really need to adapt to different browsers. There's no actual formatting to get messed up. While I enjoy creative graphics, it's nice to see pages like yours that allow my default font choice to display. Nevertheless, if you look at the trailjournals code you can see an interesting example of a conditional comment. (And there's the slashdot example I gave. It's not hard to find conditional comment spaghetti code on commercial websites.) It's difficult to make a page that complex that will behave the same way in all browsers. So the authors are pulling in some kind of giveaway javascript package to do that. Unfortunately, that also means their page layout is held hostage to javascript because they used that shortcut instead of figuring out how to actually accommodate different browsers using HTML and CSS. So some IE versions will break without script. And the menus are broken without script. And the layout in general is a bit shaky, with some visual items overlapping others. Maybe it would look better if I enabled script. But I'm viewing it in Firefox and it's set to be HTML5. So I'm guessing they just used some kind of WYSIWYG editor and settled for rough edges. The point being, it's not wrong to write code to accommodate different browsers. It's just flexible. Unless you believe it's wrong to use graphical layout at all on a webpage. Your method is certainly clean, compatible, and lightweight. But it has it's limits. Once you start getting into more involved graphics and layout design -- once you go beyond what was possible in 1998 -- you really have to use CSS and deal with browser incompatibilities. The major non-IE browsers are surprisingly dependable (assuming one doesn't try to use "cutting edge" CSS and HTML too much), for the most part, but IE is different, and different versions of IE are different again. You impress me with your technical knowledge and the way you express yourself. Just thought I'd let you know that! :-) -- David B. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
On 1/7/2019 9:00 PM, Mayayana wrote:
Maybe you didn't build it. But you linked it on your homepage. It's this link: My Pacific Crest Trail Adventure http://trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=7422 I have nothing to do with the Trail Journals site, except that... But it does appear that trailjournals is actually sort of a social site for posting personal accounts. So apparently you just joined them and then posted the link? Yes. And posting a link to a site does not mean that I would use the same coding techniques. It just means that I linked to the site. The point being, it's not wrong to write code to accommodate different browsers. Conventional wisdom in this newsgroup is that you do that by validating your HTML. If you want to validate in an older version of HTML to accommodate outdated browsers, you are free to do so. I don't see how you can trust quirks mode to render the same way in all browsers. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
On 08/01/2019 18:30, Scott Bryce wrote:
Conventional wisdom in this newsgroup is that you do that by validating your HTML. Yes I agree with you. One should validate the HTML for standards compliance; that is what standards are for. Now can you just cut this crap and move somewhere else. This is just adding more noise without adding of value here. THIS IS A WINDOWS 10 NEWSGROUP not some html/css discussion group. -- With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
"Scott Bryce" wrote
| I don't see how you can trust | quirks mode to render the same way in all browsers. Not all browsers. All versions of IE, from 6-10, plus IE11 if compatibility mode is set. Microsoft were very considerate in providing quirks mode, which provides an IE6-ish display, so that people who wanted to could avoid targetting every IE version separately with complex spaghetti code, and detailed lists of each version's quirks. (In that sense, non-quirks mode is the quirks mode.) There's actually separate rendering for quirks mode: Traditional IE rendering vs Microsoft's gradually evolving version of "standards" rendering. And it can be queried, as with this VBScript sample: If document.compatMode = "CSS1Compat" Then MsgBox "BODY content is accessed with document.documentElement.innerHTML" Else MsgBox "BODY content is accessed with document.Body.innerHTML" End If The msgbox will change depending on DOCTYPE. As for the other browsers, I think FF also has some kind of quirks mode recognition, but I've never looked into it. And I know it's not the same as IE quirks mode, because they render differently. I only know that Mozilla/WebKit seem to render in the same way. Though there is this, which seems to indicate that all major non-IE browsers have some kind of quirks mode worked out: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/...ent/compatMode I trust that if a page looks right in any recent version of FF then it will look the same in most newer/older versions, as well as in Chrome and Safari. (Within reason. I don't use Macs, but I'd guess that the colors, at least, don't look quite the same.) And I trust that in quirks mode all versions of IE, 6-10, will act the same. So that narrows it all down to 2 page versions for all browsers. Except that MS threw a wrench in the works with IE11/Edge. Edge is broken as an IE version and IE11 is broken unless compat mode is set per domain, in which case it will actually send an IE7 userAgent and act accordingly. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
In message Mayayana wrote:
"Scott Bryce" wrote | I don't see how you can trust | quirks mode to render the same way in all browsers. Not all browsers. All versions of IE, from 6-10, plus You are very confused. Quirks mode is not a Micrsoft thing. It is not an IE thing. It is how browsers try to fail graceful when ninnies write broken HTML. IE11 if compatibility mode is set. Microsoft were very considerate in providing quirks mode, which provides an IE6-ish display, so that people who wanted to could avoid targetting every IE version separately with complex spaghetti code, and detailed lists of each version's quirks. (In that sense, non-quirks mode is the quirks mode.) None of this is accurate. Most obviously, quirks mode is intended to be compatible with IE 5.0, which had full support for CSS level 1. And it is used as a failure mode for bad code, or by a browser that is not full compatible with web standards. As for the other browsers, I think FF also has some kind of quirks mode recognition, but I've never looked into it. Of course you haven't. So much for your claim that you "write for all browsers"/ I mean, we knew it was absurd when you said it, but there's proof now. And I know it's not the same as IE quirks mode, because they render differently. I only know that Mozilla/WebKit seem to render in the same way. The definition of quirks mode is that you cannot predict how it will render because the source is broken. It will do its best to render in and IE5-compatible way. Though there is this, which seems to indicate that all major non-IE browsers have some kind of quirks mode worked out: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/...ent/compatMode "Seems" to indicate. yeah. That's what it says. There's a link to Quirks Mode right in the first sentence. did you read it? https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Quirks_Mode_and_Standards_Mode And there is a further link to this: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Mozilla_quirks_mode_behavior Edge is broken as an IE version and IE11 is broken unless compat Edge is not an IE version in anyway. -- "Why do you sit there looking like an envelope without any address on it?" - Mark Twain |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
"Tim Streater" wrote
| I dunno why you obsess about MS - they were | late to the party anyway. | Obsess? I'm just trying to support as many browsers as possible with as little work as possible. Someone using IE is not MS. They're a person on a computer, trying to read pages online. This is not a political issue. Nor is it a religious issue. It's just about functionality. | All browsers operate in quirks mode if you leave out the doctype. The | problem is that they don't necessarily all quirk in the same way. | That's why you should always use a doctype and preferably that for | HTML5. You didn't fully read what I wrote. This isn't a complex concept: IE has a dependable quirks mode across versions. Firefox is different, but seems to be the same as WebKit in my experience. So 2 code versions covers all browsers, with no need of javascript or spaghetti code. If I use an HTML5 doctype I need to support numerous browsers separately, which gets into a lot of research and spaghetti code. |Personally I don't GAS if my pages look a bit different in older | versions of IE. | That's up to you. But if you don't care about older browsers then you really don't know what you're talking about in telling me I should use an HTML5 doctype. It's not necessarily just "a bit different". Ironically, much of the bloated overuse of javascript is being used to adapt to older browsers without having to understand the code. Jquery, html5shiv, etc. It's just a different kind of quirks mode, Rube Goldberg style. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
In message Mayayana wrote:
You didn't fully read what I wrote. This isn't a complex concept: IE has a dependable quirks mode across versions. Firefox is different, but seems to be the same as WebKit in my experience. So 2 code versions covers all browsers, with no need of javascript or spaghetti code. If I use an HTML5 doctype I need to support numerous browsers separately, which gets into a lot of research and spaghetti code. Your experiencen is obviously littered with a lot of nonesense. Firefox has *nothing* to do with Webkit. Nothing, at all. In fact, if Firfox has a natural enemy, it is WebKit. SMH. this is just insane. |Personally I don't GAS if my pages look a bit different in older | versions of IE. | That's up to you. But if you don't care about older browsers then you really don't know what you're talking about in telling me I should use an HTML5 doctype. It's not necessarily just "a bit different". What you still haven't answered is why you care about the minuscule tiny rounding error minority that are using deprecated and obsolete and unsupported and massively exploitable browsers. Ironically, much of the bloated overuse of javascript is being used to adapt to older browsers without having to understand the code. Jquery, html5shiv, etc. It's just a different kind of quirks mode, Rube Goldberg style. You obviously have not clue what jQuery is, just like you had no idea until this week what JSON was. -- "I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a friend.... if you have one." - GB Shaw to Churchill "Cannot possibly attend first night, will attend second... if there is one." - Winston Churchill, in response. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Error: Stray start tag script.
"Lewis" wrote
| | Your experiencen is obviously littered with a lot of nonesense. This discussion seems to be going downhill. I've said my piece, at least once, for what it's worth, so I'll quit. People are free to code as they like. Good luck. |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
SOLVED Error: Stray start tag script.
On 1/3/2019 6:59 AM, dale wrote:
On 1/2/2019 8:31 PM, Mayayana wrote: "dale" wrote | Error: Stray start tag script. | From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9 | /body?? script'undef | Β*Β* Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm not sure if they consider that an error. It looks like your webhost injected that and it could just be removed. The rest of your code is very simple and clean. (Though I don't know why you need open graph markup.) Β*Β* On the other hand, why do you care about W3C? The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better webpages. The important thing is whether it works as you expect in the major browsers. Β*Β* It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might want to consider getting a more professional host that doesn't inject crap into your pages. The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE! I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service -- dale - https://www.dalekelly.org/ Not a professional opinion unless specified. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
SOLVED Error: Stray start tag script.
On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 22:09:53 -0500, dale wrote:
On 1/3/2019 6:59 AM, dale wrote: On 1/2/2019 8:31 PM, Mayayana wrote: "dale" wrote | Error: Stray start tag script. | From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9 | /body?? script'undef | ** Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm not sure if they consider that an error. It looks like your webhost injected that and it could just be removed. The rest of your code is very simple and clean. (Though I don't know why you need open graph markup.) ** On the other hand, why do you care about W3C? The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better webpages. The important thing is whether it works as you expect in the major browsers. ** It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might want to consider getting a more professional host that doesn't inject crap into your pages. The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE! I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service But they bend to the Antifa who consider anyone who disagrees with them to be Nazis, racists, fascists and sexists. If you're registered a domain name with them, you can be sure that you'll lose it if ever you upset the Communist morons. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
SOLVED Error: Stray start tag script.
silverslimer wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 22:09:53 -0500, dale wrote: On 1/3/2019 6:59 AM, dale wrote: On 1/2/2019 8:31 PM, Mayayana wrote: "dale" wrote | Error: Stray start tag script. | From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9 | /body?? script'undef | Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm not sure if they consider that an error. It looks like your webhost injected that and it could just be removed. The rest of your code is very simple and clean. (Though I don't know why you need open graph markup.) On the other hand, why do you care about W3C? The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better webpages. The important thing is whether it works as you expect in the major browsers. It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might want to consider getting a more professional host that doesn't inject crap into your pages. The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE! I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service something something "You darker kids get off my lawn" I guess that counts as a second testimonial, a kind of antiparticle version of "+1" . It sounds like they're doing a GREAT job. Thanks for those comments Slimer. Paul |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
SOLVED Error: Stray start tag script.
In message silverslimer wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 22:09:53 -0500, dale wrote: On 1/3/2019 6:59 AM, dale wrote: On 1/2/2019 8:31 PM, Mayayana wrote: "dale" wrote | Error: Stray start tag script. | From line 105, column 2; to line 105, column 9 | /body?? script'undef | Β*Β* Maybe because it's outside the body tag? But I'm not sure if they consider that an error. It looks like your webhost injected that and it could just be removed. The rest of your code is very simple and clean. (Though I don't know why you need open graph markup.) Β*Β* On the other hand, why do you care about W3C? The letter of the law doesn't necessarily mean better webpages. The important thing is whether it works as you expect in the major browsers. Β*Β* It looks like you're hosting on GoDaddy. You might want to consider getting a more professional host that doesn't inject crap into your pages. The script in question was from my hosting provider. I called and opted-out. THANKS EVERYONE! I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service But they bend to the Antifa who consider anyone who disagrees with them to be Nazis, racists, fascists and sexists. If you're registered a domain name with them, you can be sure that you'll lose it if ever you upset the Communist morons. Translation: If youβre a neo Nazis fascist racist sack of ****, companies will not host your neo Nazis fascist racist sack of **** web site. And yes, all rational people are Anti Fascist. -- The Piper's calling you to join him |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
SOLVED Error: Stray start tag script.
On 13/01/2019 03:09, dale wrote:
I have to say GoDaddy has great customer service I had a contact with them only once when my eMail wasn't receiving anything but I was able to send. They reset the account and it took them only 10 minutes to do this. It was all by chat line and they tend to bend backwards to sort out obvious problems!!. Your scrip[t problem is the first time I have heard of. I have never seen a host injecting any scripts especially when you are paying them to host. Microsoft, AWS or Netlify can do this because they have a free versions (or sort of) for static sites (these are sites that allows J-scripts but no PHP or SQL) but they also don't. At least not for now but things may change in the future. Paying customers should not have to accept any crap from the host. Me thinks so. -- With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|