Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Of Safari, Sainsbury's and style sheets [UK]' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Of Safari, Sainsbury's and style sheets [UK]
Authored by: hembeck on Nov 18, '04 01:05:27AM

The problem is not necessarily with Mozilla browsers. The problem is in fact with IE. IE has a lot of CSS rendering bugs which have been around since versions 5/5.5. IE in some cases does not render CSS according to the standard defined by the W3C. The answer to this is not to have Mozilla acknowledge bad rendering in IE as "good", and employ those rendering bugs in it's browser. The answer is that IE should correct it's rendering engine to function properly with the CSS standard.

This correction would make web page development so much easier. For example, you want a particular column to be 200 pixels wide. That should be the end of it. 200 pixels should be the same across all browsers, but its not. Because of IE's box modeling problem, CSS developers have to use "hacks" to get IE to recognize and render 200 pixels width the same as CSS compliant browsers. This leads to extra, unecessary CSS coding.

---
--Health, Wealth and Happiness--



[ Reply to This | # ]
Of Safari, Sainsbury's and style sheets [UK]
Authored by: cheeseworm on Jan 31, '05 10:20:49AM

This is broadly true, but it's worth pointing out that the box model rendering problems have been corrected in IE6. However it's not that simple, unfortunately. In order to get IE6 to render the box model correctly HTML pages need to have the correct document type. If they don't, then IE6 reverts to quirks mode, which means it uses the old, incorrect box model rendering. And there's more! Even if the HTML page contains the correct document type, IE will still revert to quirks mode if that page also contains an XML declaration. All this and much more is described in all the gory details at www.alistapart.com



[ Reply to This | # ]