Re: [WSG] Firefox Ignoring Stylesheets

[Jens Brueckmann]

> 

Your problem is neither markup-related nor script-related. It
definitely stems from the wrong media type of the Style Sheets, as
others have already pointed out.
Test it yourself:

http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/headers?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markboulton.co.uk%2Fexamples%2Fguardian%2Fcss%2Fscreen.css

The media type is text/html instead of text/css

Cheers,

jens

-- 
Jens Brueckmann
http://www.yalf.de


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox Ignoring Stylesheets

[CK]

The following reply is from a forum where the problem was posted:

"After not being able to get this out of my head, I reproduced the  
page and put it up here;


http://six03.com/lab/guardian

After validating the page and placing the scripts in one js folder, it  
works. I think it was either the double quote at the end of the div  
(an error fixed by validating the page), the scripts not being current  
Question or the validation part, it appears to be okay now.


I'll have to pinpoint the problem and see what was up.

EDIT:

I think it is a problem with the scripts. they're not all there (see  
source code for scripts) One even points to a 404. The invalid code  
makes no difference."



On Apr 30, 2009, at 2:38 AM, Kay in t Veen wrote:


That is real strange. i am on a mac and see the same thing.
what about trying to do css import instead of including trough link  
meta?

i think i did this at http://slipper-shop.nl/


On Apr 29, 2009, at 7:50 PM, CK wrote:


Hi,

Well aware this is not a Firefox forum, but FF 3.0.9 in OS X 10.5.6  
is ignoring both print and screen stylesheets for the following:





Has anyone a suggestion?


CK





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox Ignoring Stylesheets

[Kay in t Veen]

That is real strange. i am on a mac and see the same thing.
what about trying to do css import instead of including trough link  
meta?

i think i did this at http://slipper-shop.nl/


On Apr 29, 2009, at 7:50 PM, CK wrote:


Hi,

Well aware this is not a Firefox forum, but FF 3.0.9 in OS X 10.5.6  
is ignoring both print and screen stylesheets for the following:





Has anyone a suggestion?


CK





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox Ignoring Stylesheets

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, CK wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Well aware this is not a Firefox forum, but FF 3.0.9 in OS X 10.5.6 is
> ignoring both print and screen stylesheets for the following:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone a suggestion?

Could it be because the css file is being served as text/html
instead of text/css?

-- 
   Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster 
   ===
   Author:
   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox Ignoring Stylesheets

[Felix Miata]

On 2009/04/29 10:50 (GMT-0700) CK composed:

> Well aware this is not a Firefox forum, but FF 3.0.9 in OS X 10.5.6 is  
> ignoring both print and screen stylesheets for the following:

> 

> Has anyone a suggestion?

Contact the site admin and have him fix his broken server, which claims those
CSS files are type text/HTML. Firefox is just obeying the broken server.
-- 
"He who works his land will have abundant food, but the
one who chases fantasies will have his fill of poverty."
Proverbs 28:19 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox Ignoring Stylesheets

[Алексей Тен]

Tools » Error console

Error: The stylesheet
http://www.markboulton.co.uk/examples/guardian/css/screen.css was not
loaded because its MIME type, "text/html", is not "text/css".
Source File: http://www.markboulton.co.uk/examples/guardian/


-- 
Алексей


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

RE: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[Thierry Koblentz]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Nathan de Vries
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 6:11 AM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
> 
> On 18/07/2008, at 7:45 AM, David Hucklesby wrote:
> > Of course, there are several other ways to enclose floats that do
> > not require that extra DIV.
> 
> I would have thought that the method described by PIE [1] would be the
> only sane way to do this.

I'm not sure about this, as the easyclearing method may create different
layouts across browsers.
See http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/block-formatting_context/newBFC.asp

> [1] http://www.positioniseverything.net/easyclearing.html


-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[Nathan de Vries]

On 18/07/2008, at 7:45 AM, David Hucklesby wrote:

Of course, there are several other ways to enclose floats that do
not require that extra DIV.


I would have thought that the method described by PIE [1] would be the  
only sane way to do this.


--
Nathan de Vries

[1] http://www.positioniseverything.net/easyclearing.html


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 and fieldset elements

[Barry]

I agree, don't understand why you would want to use a fieldset for navigation. 
always use the UL,OL,DL depending on navigation type.

It also doesn't have to be housed with-in a div, unless it is required for some 
other reason than positioning. As a UL is a block level element and position in 
the same manner as a div!

Hope this helps

>I would generally avoid a fieldset for navigation item's. If you can
>accomplish the effect you want with div's then use your div's. The main time
>a fieldset is used is to hold form element's.
>
>This is from the W3C site http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/
>
>The following HTML 4.01 mechanisms group content and make it easier to
>understand.:
>
>* Use FIELDSET to group form controls into semantic units and describe
>the group with the LEGEND element.
>* Use OPTGROUP to organize long lists of menu options into smaller
>groups..
>* Use tables for tabular data and describe the table with CAPTION.
>* Group table rows and columns with THEAD, TBODY, TFOOT, and COLGROUP.
>* Nest lists with UL, OL, and DL.
>* Use section headings (H1 - H6) to create structured documents and
>break up long stretches of text. Refer to the following section for more
>information.
>* Break up lines of text into paragraphs (with the P element).
>* Group related links. Refer to the section Grouping and bypassing links
>
>All of these grouping mechanisms should be used when appropriate and
>natural, i.e., when the information lends itself to logical groups. Content
>developers should not create groups randomly, as this will confuse all
>users.
>
>Your list is using the  and  selector's which the fieldset element
>is not designed to work with
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of Adam Cooper
>Sent: 30 July 2008 02:35
>To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>Subject: [WSG] Firefox 3 and fieldset elements
>
>Hi all,
>
>Just wondering if anyone can shed some light on this -
>I have a relatively positioned element with a nav element inside this.
>
>* The relatively positioned element has a 4em top margin and 40px top  
>padding.
>
>* The nav element is positioned absolutely (top 0; right 25px) with a  
>negative top margin the same as it's height (3em).
>
>If the relatively positioned element is a div, this displays fine in  
>Safari 3, FF3 and Opera 9.5.
>However, if I change this element to a fieldset, it breaks under FF3.
>
>http://www.perkler.com/ff3_problem/div.html
>http://www.perkler.com/ff3_problem/fieldset.html
>
>To make matters worse, Firebug reports no difference in the computed  
>styles between the div and fieldset elements.
>In fact, when using Firebug to highlight the navigation element, it  
>shows a "ghost" element where the navigation should be.
>
>The problem is the same whether the page is served as text/html or  
>application/xml+xhtml.
>
>Cheers,
>Adam
>
>  
>
>
>***
>List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>***
>
>
>
>-- 
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG. 
>Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.5.6/1577 - Release Date: 28/07/2008
>06:55
>
>
>
>
>***
>List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>***
>



-- 
Barry Wardrop
redRoute Creative

t: +44 01502506832
w: www.redroutecreative.co.uk
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 and fieldset elements

[Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd]

I would generally avoid a fieldset for navigation item's. If you can
accomplish the effect you want with div's then use your div's. The main time
a fieldset is used is to hold form element's.

This is from the W3C site http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/

The following HTML 4.01 mechanisms group content and make it easier to
understand.:

* Use FIELDSET to group form controls into semantic units and describe
the group with the LEGEND element.
* Use OPTGROUP to organize long lists of menu options into smaller
groups..
* Use tables for tabular data and describe the table with CAPTION.
* Group table rows and columns with THEAD, TBODY, TFOOT, and COLGROUP.
* Nest lists with UL, OL, and DL.
* Use section headings (H1 - H6) to create structured documents and
break up long stretches of text. Refer to the following section for more
information.
* Break up lines of text into paragraphs (with the P element).
* Group related links. Refer to the section Grouping and bypassing links

All of these grouping mechanisms should be used when appropriate and
natural, i.e., when the information lends itself to logical groups. Content
developers should not create groups randomly, as this will confuse all
users.

Your list is using the  and  selector's which the fieldset element
is not designed to work with


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adam Cooper
Sent: 30 July 2008 02:35
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Firefox 3 and fieldset elements

Hi all,

Just wondering if anyone can shed some light on this -
I have a relatively positioned element with a nav element inside this.

* The relatively positioned element has a 4em top margin and 40px top  
padding.

* The nav element is positioned absolutely (top 0; right 25px) with a  
negative top margin the same as it's height (3em).

If the relatively positioned element is a div, this displays fine in  
Safari 3, FF3 and Opera 9.5.
However, if I change this element to a fieldset, it breaks under FF3.

http://www.perkler.com/ff3_problem/div.html
http://www.perkler.com/ff3_problem/fieldset.html

To make matters worse, Firebug reports no difference in the computed  
styles between the div and fieldset elements.
In fact, when using Firebug to highlight the navigation element, it  
shows a "ghost" element where the navigation should be.

The problem is the same whether the page is served as text/html or  
application/xml+xhtml.

Cheers,
Adam

  


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.5.6/1577 - Release Date: 28/07/2008
06:55




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox and IE font sizes

[Hayden's Harness Attachment]

James
Thank you for your help. I have been going through what you suggested. I am not 
familular with JAVAScript, since I have heard problem stories (mainly screen 
readers and folks turning JAVA off) and seen bad implementations. I turned my 
focus to PHP. I am a newbie to all of this. I have been working on the 
following.

HTML 







%s Font
Size'; 
printf($fmt, "medium", "Default Font Size");
printf($fmt, "large",  "Increase Font Size");
printf($fmt, "small",  "Decrease Font Size");
?>

switcher.php 


http://www.choroideremia.org', '0');
header("Location: $HTTP_REFERER");
?>

The PHP does not seem to be working. I am not sure why. I am also confused why 
putting http:ééwww.choroideremia.orgé at the top of my HTML, my code is 
suddenly not valid.

Angus MacKinnon
Infoforce Services
http://www.infoforce-services.com

"Faith is the strength by which a shattered world shall emerge into
the light." - Helen Keller



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox and IE font sizes

[James Ellis]

On Sunday 27 July 2008 08:41:04 Hayden's Harness Attachment wrote:
> At http://www.choroideremia.org/new/crf_header.php I have three buttons.
> The first is "Decrease font size" the second is ?Default font size". And
> the third is "Increase font size:. Firefox 3.0.1 shows them in 15 point
> Arial font which I would say is good to default to. However, IE7 will show
> the in 21 point Arial. I would say IE7's font choice is to large. How do I
> get Fire fox and IE to both display 15 point Arial?
>
> Angus MacKinnon
> Infoforce Services
> http://www.infoforce-services.com
>
> "Faith is the strength by which a shattered world shall emerge into
> the light." - Helen Keller
>

Hi

I looked at your CSS and can't see any" point" font sizes, only %age sizes 
(which is ok in itself)  - so can't really relate what you mention above to 
what I'm seeing. Remember "pts" are for print stylesheets.

There are also some problems with your page - whitespace above the doctype 
will cause IE to barf out into quirks mode. The medium and large switcheroo 
things don't seem to be linked properly. When I hit the links in FF3.01 the 
font size doesn't change.

I can give you some advice on stylesheet switching though.. instead of 
refreshing the whole page with unnecessary server load and adding in a 
stylesheet based on a url, try switch the id of the body tag. This assumes you 
know how to and can apply an event listener to an element using a JS library 
of some description.

[pseudocode]
//html
increase
//js
foo.attachEventListener(
foo.get('font_large'),//element
   'click',//event
   function() {
 //get the 'body' element somehow
body.setAttribute('id', 'large');
//store change in a cookie so it can propagate across pages
   }
//css
body {
  font-size : 100%;
  /* other generic styles */
}
body#large {
 font-size : 120%;
}
body#small {
 font-size : 80%;
}
[/pseudocode]

You could also implement and increase,decrease handler and apply body font-
size in increment/decrements


HTH

J


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox and IE font sizes

[James Ellis]

On Sunday 27 July 2008 08:41:04 Hayden's Harness Attachment wrote:
> At http://www.choroideremia.org/new/crf_header.php I have three buttons.
> The first is "Decrease font size" the second is ?Default font size". And
> the third is "Increase font size:. Firefox 3.0.1 shows them in 15 point
> Arial font which I would say is good to default to. However, IE7 will show
> the in 21 point Arial. I would say IE7's font choice is to large. How do I
> get Fire fox and IE to both display 15 point Arial?
>
> Angus MacKinnon
> Infoforce Services
> http://www.infoforce-services.com
>
> "Faith is the strength by which a shattered world shall emerge into
> the light." - Helen Keller
>

Hi

I looked at your CSS and can't see any" point" font sizes, only %age sizes 
(which is ok in itself)  - so can't really relate what you mention above to 
what I'm seeing. Remember "pts" are for print stylesheets.

There are also some problems with your page - whitespace above the doctype 
will cause IE to barf out into quirks mode. The medium and large switcheroo 
things don't seem to be linked properly. When I hit the links in FF3.01 the 
font size doesn't change.

I can give you some advice on stylesheet switching though.. instead of 
refreshing the whole page with unnecessary server load and adding in a 
stylesheet based on a url, try switch the id of the body tag. This assumes you 
know how to and can apply an event listener to an element using a JS library 
of some description.

[pseudocode]
//html
increase
//js
foo.attachEventListener(
foo.get('font_large'),//element
   'click',//event
   function() {
 //get the 'body' element somehow
body.setAttribute('id', 'large');
//store change in a cookie so it can propagate across pages
   }
//css
body {
  font-size : 100%;
  /* other generic styles */
}
body#large {
 font-size : 120%;
}
body#small {
 font-size : 80%;
}
[/pseudocode]

You could also implement and increase,decrease handler and apply body font-
size in increment/decrements


HTH

J


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[David Hucklesby]

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
 Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
 Why do you think that it is important to stuff something invisible inside 
 an
 (otherwise) empty div?


For some reason, Internet Explorer thinks an empty DIV - "" -
contains text, and may create an unwanted gap. Adding a comment
directly between opening and closing DIV tags somehow convinces IE
that the DIV really is empty. Result - no gap.

kevin mcmonagle wrote:
> empty div wont validate right?
> 
 It will.

Cordially,
David
--



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[kevin mcmonagle]

empty div wont validate right?


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not the clearing div, I know what that is for!! 
What is the _content_ of the div supposed to do, that an truly empty div

would not?

Mike

  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kevin mcmonagle

Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 10:33 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

its used as a shim.


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
Why do you think that it is important to stuff something invisible 
inside an (otherwise) empty div?


Regards,
Mike
 
  



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


  





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[michael.brockington]

Not the clearing div, I know what that is for!! 
What is the _content_ of the div supposed to do, that an truly empty div
would not?

Mike

>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kevin mcmonagle
>Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 10:33 AM
>To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
>
>its used as a shim.
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
>> Why do you think that it is important to stuff something invisible 
>> inside an (otherwise) empty div?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mike
>>  


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[kevin mcmonagle]

its used as a shim.


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
Why do you think that it is important to stuff something invisible
inside an (otherwise) empty div?

Regards,
Mike
 

  





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[michael.brockington]

Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
Why do you think that it is important to stuff something invisible
inside an (otherwise) empty div?

Regards,
Mike
 

>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Hucklesby
>Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:46 PM
>To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
>
>> Andrew Newman wrote re: using a DIV to enclose floats:
>>
>>> a little more valid / semantic 
>>>
>>> div.clearer {clear: both; line-height: 0; height: 0;}
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>
>Of course, that will create an extra vertical space in the 
>layout. If that space is unwanted, you could alternatively use this:
>
>  
>
>The empty comment prevents this space.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[David Hucklesby]

> Andrew Newman wrote re: using a DIV to enclose floats:
>
>> a little more valid / semantic 
>>
>> div.clearer {clear: both; line-height: 0; height: 0;}
>>
>>  
>>

Of course, that will create an extra vertical space in the layout. If that
space is unwanted, you could alternatively use this:

  

The empty comment prevents this space.

Of course, there are several other ways to enclose floats that do
not require that extra DIV.

Cordially,
David
--



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[kevin mcmonagle]

Andrew Newman wrote:


a little more valid / semantic 

div.clearer {clear: both; line-height: 0; height: 0;}

 

On 17/07/2008, at 4:04 AM, kevin mcmonagle wrote:



now i can validate.

thank you
-kevin



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[Andrew Newman]

a little more valid / semantic 

div.clearer {clear: both; line-height: 0; height: 0;}

 

On 17/07/2008, at 4:04 AM, kevin mcmonagle wrote:


Thank you david,
a tip from that article has me sorted.

I put a div at the bottom of the rapper content like this:

  

.clear{clear:both}

nice trick just kind of forces,


but I still dont understand why the outer wrapper would'nt scale  
automatically with three
columns in an inner wrapper with no heights set anywhere /unless / 
the  outerwrapper was floated left or right itself..


-best
kevin

David Hucklesby wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:08:47 +0100, kevin mcmonagle wrote:


hi,
I have a wrapper in that wont scale to its contained content/divs  
but there are no
heights set in the divs that i can see. Is there something else  
that can cause this? -




Yes. If the content has A.P. blocks or floats that are not  
"contained"

then the containing DIV might not expand.

If the problem is due to floats, there are several methods available
for "containing" them here:



Cordially,
David






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[Thierry Koblentz]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of kevin mcmonagle
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:05 AM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
> 
> Thank you david,
> a tip from that article has me sorted.
> 
> I put a div at the bottom of the rapper content like this:
> 
> 
> 
> .clear{clear:both}
> 
> nice trick just kind of forces,
> 
> 
>  but I still dont understand why the outer wrapper would'nt scale
> automatically with three
> columns in an inner wrapper with no heights set anywhere /unless /the
> outerwrapper was floated left or right itself..

Hi Kevin,

This may help:
http://tjkdesign.com/articles/clearing-floats_and_block-formatting_context.asp


-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com







***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[Matijs]

These days it's also known how to do a clear without an additional clearing
div... try giving the troublesome div overflow:hidden en you should also be
sorted.

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 8:04 PM, kevin mcmonagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Thank you david,
> a tip from that article has me sorted.
>
> I put a div at the bottom of the rapper content like this:
>
>   
>
> .clear{clear:both}
>
> nice trick just kind of forces,
>
>
> but I still dont understand why the outer wrapper would'nt scale
> automatically with three
> columns in an inner wrapper with no heights set anywhere /unless /the
>  outerwrapper was floated left or right itself..
>
> -best
> kevin
>
>
> David Hucklesby wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:08:47 +0100, kevin mcmonagle wrote:
>>
>>
>>> hi,
>>> I have a wrapper in that wont scale to its contained content/divs but
>>> there are no
>>> heights set in the divs that i can see. Is there something else that can
>>> cause this? -
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes. If the content has A.P. blocks or floats that are not "contained"
>> then the containing DIV might not expand.
>>
>> If the problem is due to floats, there are several methods available
>> for "containing" them here:
>>
>>  
>>
>> Cordially,
>> David
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[kevin mcmonagle]

Thank you david,
a tip from that article has me sorted.

I put a div at the bottom of the rapper content like this:

   

.clear{clear:both}

nice trick just kind of forces,


but I still dont understand why the outer wrapper would'nt scale 
automatically with three
columns in an inner wrapper with no heights set anywhere /unless /the  
outerwrapper was floated left or right itself..


-best
kevin

David Hucklesby wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:08:47 +0100, kevin mcmonagle wrote:
  

hi,
I have a wrapper in that wont scale to its contained content/divs but there are 
no
heights set in the divs that i can see. Is there something else that can cause 
this? -



Yes. If the content has A.P. blocks or floats that are not "contained"
then the containing DIV might not expand.

If the problem is due to floats, there are several methods available
for "containing" them here:

 

Cordially,
David
  





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height

[David Hucklesby]

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:08:47 +0100, kevin mcmonagle wrote:
> hi,
> I have a wrapper in that wont scale to its contained content/divs but there 
> are no
> heights set in the divs that i can see. Is there something else that can 
> cause this? -

Yes. If the content has A.P. blocks or floats that are not "contained"
then the containing DIV might not expand.

If the problem is due to floats, there are several methods available
for "containing" them here:

 

Cordially,
David
--



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'

[Alastair Campbell]

Ken McInnes wrote:
> Most browsers will render this OK, BUT Firefox 3 WILL NOT.
> It just renders the page with nothing on it. :-(

I had a similar issue a fwe years ago in IE6, where a script tag with
nothing inside (i.e. ) would cause IE6 to show a
blank screen, although I think it was in a particular environment, as
it doesn't always happen.

Re: Element Minimization and Empty Element Content
Doesn't that mean the validators should catch it?

Cheers,

-Alastair


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'

[Сергей Кириченко]

http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interact/scripts.html#edef-SCRIPT

"*Start tag: required, End tag: required*"

http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#prohibitions

"C.3. Element Minimization and Empty Element Content

Given an empty instance of an element whose content model is not EMPTY (for
example, an empty title or paragraph) do not use the minimized form (e.g.
use   and not )."

or you don't like firefox loves standarts?



2008/6/24 Ken McInnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> G'day all,
>
> Just a quick 'heads up' on Firefox 3 rendering compared with Firefox 2
> rendering.
>
> If you 'self-close' a script element in the head, the validators will not
> pick it up as a problem
> - is is well formed xml (element is self-closed) and
> - it is validly placed (correctly placed within the 'head')
>
> Most browsers will render this OK, BUT Firefox 3 WILL NOT.
> It just renders the page with nothing on it. :-(
>
> All the pages that I detected this issue were xhtml 1.0 strict, without xml
> declarations, served up as 'text/html'.
> [ Do not have time to experiment at present - up to the eyebrows in
> marking. ]
>
> Just thought I would pass it on, as it is worth a quick search of your
> webpage coding to see if you have this issue.
>
> BTW, as a Uni lecturer in Internet Technologies / Web Development I have
> seen lots of html coding problems / validation problems when students do
> things like close 'img' or 'input' elements and validators do not pick it up
> - but have not detected any problems with the script element before.
>
> Browsers are usually to  forgiving of sloppy code and will render just
> about anything, but this is an interesting change.
>
> regards
>
> Ken McInnes
> Adjuct Teaching Fellow
> Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies
> Swinburne University of Technology
> P O Box 218
> Hawthorn,  Victoria3122
> Australia
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'

[Svip]

I believe this problem has always exited in Firefox.  Though, I have
no idea why...

/me strokes beard.

Regards,
Svip

2008/6/24 Matijs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>  works
>  doesn't
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:38 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone have an example of this behaviour? Not quite sure I follow
>> the issue...
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> >-Original Message-
>> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken McInnes
>> >Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:55 AM
>> >To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>> >Subject: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'
>> >
>> >G'day all,
>> >
>> >Just a quick 'heads up' on Firefox 3 rendering compared with
>> >Firefox 2 rendering.
>> >
>> >If you 'self-close' a script element in the head, the
>> >validators will not pick it up as a problem
>> > - is is well formed xml (element is self-closed) and
>> > - it is validly placed (correctly placed within the 'head')
>> >
>>
>>
>> ***
>> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ***
>>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'

[Matijs]

 works
 doesn't



On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:38 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Does anyone have an example of this behaviour? Not quite sure I follow
> the issue...
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
>
>
> >-Original Message-
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken McInnes
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:55 AM
> >To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> >Subject: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'
> >
> >G'day all,
> >
> >Just a quick 'heads up' on Firefox 3 rendering compared with
> >Firefox 2 rendering.
> >
> >If you 'self-close' a script element in the head, the
> >validators will not pick it up as a problem
> > - is is well formed xml (element is self-closed) and
> > - it is validly placed (correctly placed within the 'head')
> >
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'

[michael.brockington]

Does anyone have an example of this behaviour? Not quite sure I follow
the issue...

Regards,
Mike

 

>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken McInnes
>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:55 AM
>To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>Subject: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'
>
>G'day all,
>
>Just a quick 'heads up' on Firefox 3 rendering compared with 
>Firefox 2 rendering.
>
>If you 'self-close' a script element in the head, the 
>validators will not pick it up as a problem
> - is is well formed xml (element is self-closed) and
> - it is validly placed (correctly placed within the 'head')
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Paul Collins]

Thanks for your replies everyone. I finally got both versions working!


2008/6/23 Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 2008/06/23 11:42 (GMT+0100) Steve Green apparently typed:
>
>> You can still get some old versions from the Mozilla FTP site at
>> http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/
>
>> It's ludicrous that they have removed some old versions - can they really
>> not afford the disk space? Obviously users should not be installing old
>> versions but developers and testers still need them for testing. We download
>> and store all the English versions but it's not practical to save all the
>> localised versions too.
>
> They should still be there, but on
> http://archive.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/ . That is
> currently redirecting to
> http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/ which I think
> is broken behavior.
> ftp://archive.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases works.
> --
> "Where were you when I laid the earth's
> foundation?"   Matthew 7:12 NIV
>
>  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>
> Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Felix Miata]

On 2008/06/23 11:42 (GMT+0100) Steve Green apparently typed:

> You can still get some old versions from the Mozilla FTP site at
> http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/

> It's ludicrous that they have removed some old versions - can they really
> not afford the disk space? Obviously users should not be installing old
> versions but developers and testers still need them for testing. We download
> and store all the English versions but it's not practical to save all the
> localised versions too.

They should still be there, but on
http://archive.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/ . That is
currently redirecting to
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/ which I think
is broken behavior.
ftp://archive.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases works.
-- 
"Where were you when I laid the earth's
foundation?"   Matthew 7:12 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Steve Green]

You can still get some old versions from the Mozilla FTP site at
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/
 
It's ludicrous that they have removed some old versions - can they really
not afford the disk space? Obviously users should not be installing old
versions but developers and testers still need them for testing. We download
and store all the English versions but it's not practical to save all the
localised versions too.
 
Steve
 
 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Sagnik Dey
Sent: 23 June 2008 11:21
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate



Hi Paul,

You can download Firefox Ver 2.0 from .

http://www.oldapps.com/firefox.htm 

This is a very good website for downloading older appz.

-- 
Cheers to life

Sagnik ::
26four79.com




On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:


Hi all,

Thanks for your replies to this thread last week. I'm on a PC today
and trying to get both versions of Firefox running, the only issue is,
I can't find where to download version 2 of Firefox anymore! Mozilla
have made it very hard to find previous versions

Does anyone know where you can get version 2?!

Cheers

2008/6/19 Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> select custom install and install it to another directory (something like
/Mozilla/Firefox3) and the two will run side-by-side.
>
> You can do this with Opera too.
> :)
> Paul
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***








***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Paul Collins]

Thanks Sagnik, that is a good site!


2008/6/23 Sagnik Dey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> You can download Firefox Ver 2.0 from .
>
> http://www.oldapps.com/firefox.htm
>
> This is a very good website for downloading older appz.
>
> --
> Cheers to life
>
> Sagnik ::
> 26four79.com
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thanks for your replies to this thread last week. I'm on a PC today
>> and trying to get both versions of Firefox running, the only issue is,
>> I can't find where to download version 2 of Firefox anymore! Mozilla
>> have made it very hard to find previous versions
>>
>> Does anyone know where you can get version 2?!
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> 2008/6/19 Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > select custom install and install it to another directory (something
>> > like /Mozilla/Firefox3) and the two will run side-by-side.
>> >
>> > You can do this with Opera too.
>> > :)
>> > Paul
>> >
>> >
>> > ***
>> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > ***
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ***
>> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ***
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Joshua Street]

http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/all-older.html

That's the official source.

On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for your replies to this thread last week. I'm on a PC today
> and trying to get both versions of Firefox running, the only issue is,
> I can't find where to download version 2 of Firefox anymore! Mozilla
> have made it very hard to find previous versions
>
> Does anyone know where you can get version 2?!
>
> Cheers
>
> 2008/6/19 Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > select custom install and install it to another directory (something like
> /Mozilla/Firefox3) and the two will run side-by-side.
> >
> > You can do this with Opera too.
> > :)
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > ***
> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ***
> >
> >
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


-- 
Josh Street

http://josh.st/
+61 (0) 425 808 469


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Sagnik Dey]

Hi Paul,

You can download Firefox Ver 2.0 from .

http://www.oldapps.com/firefox.htm

This is a very good website for downloading older appz.

-- 
Cheers to life

Sagnik ::
26four79.com



On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for your replies to this thread last week. I'm on a PC today
> and trying to get both versions of Firefox running, the only issue is,
> I can't find where to download version 2 of Firefox anymore! Mozilla
> have made it very hard to find previous versions
>
> Does anyone know where you can get version 2?!
>
> Cheers
>
> 2008/6/19 Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > select custom install and install it to another directory (something like
> /Mozilla/Firefox3) and the two will run side-by-side.
> >
> > You can do this with Opera too.
> > :)
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > ***
> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ***
> >
> >
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Paul Collins]

Hi all,

Thanks for your replies to this thread last week. I'm on a PC today
and trying to get both versions of Firefox running, the only issue is,
I can't find where to download version 2 of Firefox anymore! Mozilla
have made it very hard to find previous versions

Does anyone know where you can get version 2?!

Cheers

2008/6/19 Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> select custom install and install it to another directory (something like 
> /Mozilla/Firefox3) and the two will run side-by-side.
>
> You can do this with Opera too.
> :)
> Paul
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Paul Bennett]

select custom install and install it to another directory (something like 
/Mozilla/Firefox3) and the two will run side-by-side.

You can do this with Opera too.
:)
Paul


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox rendering issue

[dwain]

hi lynette,
make sure fire fox sees it correctly, then make corrections for ie.
hth,
dwain

On 6/18/08, Lynette Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  http://www.americanmotorcycles.com.au/spyder.html
>
>  IE displays as intended but since I made some changes to other parts of the
> site, Firefox displays incorrectly.
>
>  It seems to want to put  #contentdata directly under  #box instead of under
>  #contentpics.
>
>  Can anyone see where I have gone wrong?
>
>  Thanks
>
>  Lyn
>
>  Western Web Design
>  Affordable website design, Perth
>
> ***
> List Guidelines:
> http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe:
> http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***


-- 
dwain alford
"The artist may use any form which his expression demands;
for his inner impulse must find suitable expression."  Kandinsky


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3

[Sam Sherlock]

all I have to do is create had to do was create a new profile and set
shortcuts to
load ff3 with the new profile.

heres some info
http://blog.codefront.net/2007/08/20/how-to-have-firefox-3-and-firefox-2-running-at-the-same-time/

2008/6/18 Sajan Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> It will replace the version 2 with the new one, and many of the plugins
> that works on version 2 gets disable since they aren't compatible. I did a
> mistake updating.
>
> Sajan
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On 2008/06/18 13:17 (GMT+0100) Paul Collins apparently typed:
>>
>> > Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
>> > it run side by side?!
>>
>> It doesn't have to. There are instructions on the mozilla.org developer
>> pages
>> for running as many concurrent versions of Gecko products as you wish. The
>> particulars depend on your environment. Linux & Mac & Win don't all work
>> exactly the same.
>>
>> Don't install as replacement before checking if extensions you depend on
>> are
>> ready for it.
>> --
>> "Where were you when I laid the earth's
>> foudation?"Matthew 7:12 NIV
>>
>>  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>>
>> Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
>>
>>
>> ***
>> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ***
>>
>>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3

[Sajan Franco]

It will replace the version 2 with the new one, and many of the plugins that
works on version 2 gets disable since they aren't compatible. I did a
mistake updating.

Sajan

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On 2008/06/18 13:17 (GMT+0100) Paul Collins apparently typed:
>
> > Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> > it run side by side?!
>
> It doesn't have to. There are instructions on the mozilla.org developer
> pages
> for running as many concurrent versions of Gecko products as you wish. The
> particulars depend on your environment. Linux & Mac & Win don't all work
> exactly the same.
>
> Don't install as replacement before checking if extensions you depend on
> are
> ready for it.
> --
> "Where were you when I laid the earth's
> foudation?"Matthew 7:12 NIV
>
>  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>
> Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Luke Hoggett]

Firebug (1.20b3 seems stable) and web developer toolbar both are now 
compatible with FF3. Make sure you get the versions from the Mozilla 
Add-ons pages as these are currently the most up to date.


On a PC if you need to run both FF3and FF2 you can run the portable 
versions of either of them from 
http://portableapps.com/apps/internet/firefox_portable. 
 check the 
bottom of the page for FF2 links. On a mac do a search for portable or 
standalone firefox and there are instructions around showing you how to 
set up a second profile so that they don't interfere with each other.


Jason Grant wrote:

It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work 
with.

FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so 
crucial for us of course.


Regards,

Jason
www.flexewebs.com/semantix 

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> wrote:


Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
it run side by side?!

Cheers


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[kate]

Got it Cortney thanks!
Great little addon it is too.
Kate
- Original Message - 
From: "Cortney Sellers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 3:59 PM
Subject: RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate



Nope - I have firebug n FF 2 and am on a PC (I also have a slew of other
awesome extensions too)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of kate
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 9:52 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Can some kind person tell me..

..is Firebug only for the Mac as I have a PC.
Thanks
Kate
- Original Message - 
From: "russ - maxdesign" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Web Standards Group" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate



Maybe a mac thing but I have have a variety of FF versions (as well as
Moz,
Opera, Safari, IE and Netscape versions) going back in time on one laptop
and can open any as needed. The only limitation I've noticed with Moz
related browsers is that you can only open one at a time.


on 18/6/08 10:17 PM, Paul Collins at wrote:


Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
it run side by side?!

Cheers





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***









No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1507 - Release Date: 6/18/2008
7:09 AM



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***








No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1507 - Release Date: 6/18/2008 
7:09 AM




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Stewart Griffiths]

firebug 1.2 works fine on FF3 and is available from the add-ons on the
mozilla site:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1843

Stew

2008/6/18 Ken Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Quoting kate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>  Ken,
>> Its said this am that there is a problem and so no Firebug for my FF3
>> at least.
>> This was at the Mozilla site.
>>
>
> [snip]
>
>  Firebug is available for FF3 at the normal FF addons area.
>>> 
>>>
>>
> I just went to the above site and it's there with no problems. I downloaded
> it this morning. It works fine on a PC.
>
> Ken
>
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Ken Robinson]

Quoting kate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Ken,
Its said this am that there is a problem and so no Firebug for my FF3
at least.
This was at the Mozilla site.


[snip]


Firebug is available for FF3 at the normal FF addons area.



I just went to the above site and it's there with no problems. I  
downloaded it this morning. It works fine on a PC.


Ken



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Dave Woods]

I've downloaded Firebug 1.1 Beta and it seems to work fine with Firefox 3

http://getfirebug.com/releases/

Hope that helps.

- - - - -
http://www.dave-woods.co.uk


2008/6/18 kate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

>  I hear about so many goodies on my lists I tried to dl Firebug (if our
> people like it its got to be awesome...hahaahah) But FF said it had a
> problem and would not allow in FF3.
> Glad you mentioned Firebug Jason - thanks!
> Kate
>
> - Original Message -
> *From:* Jason Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:32 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate
>
> It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
> Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work
> with.
> FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
> Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so
> crucial for us of course.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jason
> www.flexewebs.com/semantix
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
>> it run side by side?!
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> ***
>> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
>> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ***
>>
>>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
> --
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1507 - Release Date: 6/18/2008
> 7:09 AM
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Cortney Sellers]

Nope - I have firebug n FF 2 and am on a PC (I also have a slew of other
awesome extensions too)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of kate
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 9:52 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

Can some kind person tell me..

..is Firebug only for the Mac as I have a PC.
Thanks
Kate
- Original Message - 
From: "russ - maxdesign" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Web Standards Group" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate


> Maybe a mac thing but I have have a variety of FF versions (as well as 
> Moz,
> Opera, Safari, IE and Netscape versions) going back in time on one laptop
> and can open any as needed. The only limitation I've noticed with Moz
> related browsers is that you can only open one at a time.
>
>
> on 18/6/08 10:17 PM, Paul Collins at wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
>> it run side by side?!
>>
>> Cheers
>
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1507 - Release Date: 6/18/2008 
7:09 AM



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[kate]

Got it now thanksFirebug
Kate
- Original Message - 
From: "Ken Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate



Quoting Jason Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work 
with.

FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so 
crucial

for us of course.


Firebug is available for FF3 at the normal FF addons area.
<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1843>

Ken



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***








No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1507 - Release Date: 6/18/2008 
7:09 AM




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[kate]

Can some kind person tell me..

..is Firebug only for the Mac as I have a PC.
Thanks
Kate
- Original Message - 
From: "russ - maxdesign" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Web Standards Group" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate


Maybe a mac thing but I have have a variety of FF versions (as well as 
Moz,

Opera, Safari, IE and Netscape versions) going back in time on one laptop
and can open any as needed. The only limitation I've noticed with Moz
related browsers is that you can only open one at a time.


on 18/6/08 10:17 PM, Paul Collins at wrote:


Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
it run side by side?!

Cheers





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***








No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1507 - Release Date: 6/18/2008 
7:09 AM




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[kate]

Ken,
Its said this am that there is a problem and so no Firebug for my FF3 at 
least.

This was at the Mozilla site.
Kate
- Original Message - 
From: "Ken Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate



Quoting Jason Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work 
with.

FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so 
crucial

for us of course.


Firebug is available for FF3 at the normal FF addons area.
<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1843>

Ken



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***








No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1507 - Release Date: 6/18/2008 
7:09 AM




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[kate]

I hear about so many goodies on my lists I tried to dl Firebug (if our people 
like it its got to be awesome...hahaahah) But FF said it had a problem and 
would not allow in FF3.
Glad you mentioned Firebug Jason - thanks!
Kate
  - Original Message - 
  From: Jason Grant 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:32 PM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate


  It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-( 
  Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work with.
  FF3 is very nice and I am excited. 
  Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so crucial 
for us of course.

  Regards,

  Jason 
  www.flexewebs.com/semantix 


  On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
it run side by side?!

Cheers


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***




  ***
  List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
  Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ***


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG. 
  Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1507 - Release Date: 6/18/2008 
7:09 AM


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Léo Siqueira]

Just check for Firebug at the Mozilla FF Add-On website, there´s a new
version compatible with the FF3.


Regards,

Léo Siqueira
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(19) 9111-2239


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Tom Livingston]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Jason Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
> Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work with.
> FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
> Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so crucial
> for us of course.


I am using FireBug 1.2.0b2 with FF3. Works fine.


-- 

Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic |
ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Rob Crowther]

James Ellis wrote:
you can run either version from the relevant file 
location, but not at the same time.


You can run any number of versions at the same time, but you have to use 
separate profiles - the profile can only be active in one instance at a 
time.


You have to use the -no-remote command line switch (either on the 
command line or modify the shortcut) and use -P to specify the profile, 
like this:


firefox.exe -no-remote -P default

Will start a separate instance of Firefox with the default profile (if 
it's not already in use), then:


firefox.exe -no-remote -P default30

Will start another separate instance with the default30 profile 
(assuming you've created it).  The proviso is your 'main' version of 
Firefox needs to run without -no-remote if you want the desktop 
integration stuff to work properly, so you have to start that first. 
You can use the -ProfileManager switch to get the dialogue for creating 
new profiles the first time.


Obviously, adjust all the above for file extensions and paths 
appropriate to your platform.


Rob


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[James Ellis]

Hi 

That's not exactly right .. if you install v3 to a different location (tip: 
choose Custom install) then you can run either version from the relevant file 
location, but not at the same time.
The only problem you will find is compatibility with some extensions when you 
run FF3. If you want to go back to FF2 for Firebug support then it will 
automatically re-enable it. At least that what it just did for me.
Your profile will be shared between both versions as well.

This is true for Linux versions as well - you can either install both versions 
using your distro's package manager or run it from the tarball.

I doubt Mozilla would go down the path of IE - I'd be annoyed if I had 
to  'MultipleFF'  as well, or run up a new virtual machine for every 
version...

HTH
James


On Wednesday 18 June 2008 22:32:16 Jason Grant wrote:
> It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
> Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work
> with. FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
> Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so
> crucial for us of course.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jason
> www.flexewebs.com/semantix
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> > Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> > it run side by side?!
> >
> > Cheers




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Maarten Stolte]

definitely a mac thing, not sharing libraries like windows dll hell...

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 2:47 PM, russ - maxdesign <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe a mac thing but I have have a variety of FF versions (as well as Moz,
> Opera, Safari, IE and Netscape versions) going back in time on one laptop
> and can open any as needed. The only limitation I've noticed with Moz
> related browsers is that you can only open one at a time.
>
>
> on 18/6/08 10:17 PM, Paul Collins at wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
>> it run side by side?!
>>
>> Cheers
>
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Fabio Espindula]

Firebug 1.1 works fine on firefox3.



Jason Grant wrote:

It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work 
with.

FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so 
crucial for us of course.


Regards,

Jason
www.flexewebs.com/semantix 

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> wrote:


Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
it run side by side?!

Cheers


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** 



--
Fabio Espindula 
User Interface Developer
TownConnect Inc.
www.townconnect.com 


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Ken Robinson]

Quoting Jason Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work with.
FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so crucial
for us of course.


Firebug is available for FF3 at the normal FF addons area.  



Ken



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Roberto Castaldo]

Here’s a good solution (it works on my pc) to keep both Firefox 2 and 3 : "
<http://blogs.cozi.com/tech/2008/04/multiple-firefo.html> Multiple Firefox
Profiles: Run Firefox 2 and 3 Side-By-Side, and More"

 

Best regards,

 

Roberto

 

 

Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Per
conto di Léo Siqueira
Inviato: mercoledì 18 giugno 2008 14.41
A: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Oggetto: Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

 

Paul,

When you start the installation you need to make the Custom setup and change
the install directory, but you will need to create a new shortcut for the
old version of FF.

Regards,
Léo 

2008/6/18 Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
it run side by side?!

Cheers


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***




-- 
-- 

[]´s

Léo Siqueira
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(19) 9111-2239 
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[russ - maxdesign]

Maybe a mac thing but I have have a variety of FF versions (as well as Moz,
Opera, Safari, IE and Netscape versions) going back in time on one laptop
and can open any as needed. The only limitation I've noticed with Moz
related browsers is that you can only open one at a time.


on 18/6/08 10:17 PM, Paul Collins at wrote:

> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> it run side by side?!
> 
> Cheers




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Joseph Ortenzi]

if you have a mac you can rename it firefox3 so you can run it side by  
side, but your extensions might get confused...

On Jun 18, 2008, at 13:17, Paul Collins wrote:


Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
it run side by side?!

Cheers


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



==
Joe Ortenzi
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3

[Felix Miata]

On 2008/06/18 13:17 (GMT+0100) Paul Collins apparently typed:

> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> it run side by side?!

It doesn't have to. There are instructions on the mozilla.org developer pages
for running as many concurrent versions of Gecko products as you wish. The
particulars depend on your environment. Linux & Mac & Win don't all work
exactly the same.

Don't install as replacement before checking if extensions you depend on are
ready for it.
-- 
"Where were you when I laid the earth's
foudation?"Matthew 7:12 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Léo Siqueira]

Paul,

When you start the installation you need to make the Custom setup and change
the install directory, but you will need to create a new shortcut for the
old version of FF.

Regards,
Léo

2008/6/18 Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> it run side by side?!
>
> Cheers
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


-- 
-- 

[]´s

Léo Siqueira
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(19) 9111-2239


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Jonathan D'mello]

it will replace your version of Firefox.
But you can now get the official release of FF3!

Jonathan



On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> it run side by side?!
>
> Cheers
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Svip]

It will replace it, unless you "backup" your Firefox 2 client and move
it somewhere where Firefox 3 cannot get to it.

/Svip

2008/6/18 Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> it run side by side?!
>
> Cheers
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[Jason Grant]

It will replace it even if you install into different directory. :-(
Then it means you are not going to have your FireBug available to work with.
FF3 is very nice and I am excited.
Just can't wait for FireBug to become compatible with it as it is so crucial
for us of course.

Regards,

Jason
www.flexewebs.com/semantix

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> it run side by side?!
>
> Cheers
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 candidate

[sundar]

It will replace, probably portable firefox2 an option to use both.

Sundar

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Does anyone know if it will replace your version of Firefox 2, or will
> it run side by side?!
>
> Cheers
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


-- 
Sundar


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[Felix Miata]

On 2008/05/21 07:43 (GMT+1000) Korny Sietsma apparently typed:

> Sorry, I didn't mean "if I had FF3 running" - I had it *installed* but not
> running. And maybe I could have made it work, but I was under time
> pressure. I just installed FF2 through Ubuntu's standard "apt" system, and
> I'd hoped that it would be configured to install it completely 
> independently.

> When I have more time I'll try again - but running a beta browser, with an
> alpha of FireBug, I wasn't really very surprised to have stability issues.
> Maybe I should have been.

With Linux distros, except in unusual circumstances, and assuming more than
one version exists to choose from, you have to choose only one version of an
application to install through the package management system. Other versions
must be installed outside the normal package management system.

With Mozilla products, it's usually best to install the stable version via
package management, then use bzip or whatever is required of the available
development or pre-release version in question to place in your $HOME tree or
/usr/local tree.

If you had a problem installing a mozilla.org build, odds are you didn't have
proper deps installed, probably the compat libstdc++5 library, or whatever
the Debian system calls it, or a new enough pango.

Another option if you want FF3 as your main (via package management) but to
keep FF2 for testing is to use Epiphany in lieu of FF2. Plans have been made
to switch Epiphany from Gecko to Webkit, but I don't think that will happen
before FF2 has had time to nearly die.

Oh, and FF3rc1 was out 3 days ago. If Debian sources now have the v3rc
available, it may be time to think about instead making it your normal, and
installing the mozilla.org release of FF 2.0.0.14 in $HOME or /usr/local.
-- 
". . . . in everything, do to others what you would
have them do to you . . . ."   Matthew 7:12 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[Korny Sietsma]

Sorry, I didn't mean "if I had FF3 running" - I had it *installed* but
not running.
And maybe I could have made it work, but I was under time pressure. I
just installed FF2 through Ubuntu's standard "apt" system, and I'd
hoped that it would be configured to install it completely
independently.

When I have more time I'll try again - but running a beta browser,
with an alpha of FireBug, I wasn't really very surprised to have
stability issues.  Maybe I should have been.

As for vmware - I guess I'm used to it, I already use vmware to test
different versions of ie, so adding Firefox to one of them isn't a
biggie.

- Korny

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008/05/20 18:27 (GMT+1000) Korny Sietsma apparently typed:
>
>> I have had problems running FF2 on a machine also running FF3 -
>> specifically, and fatally for me, FireBug wouldn't install cleanly in
>> FF2 if I had FF3 running.
>
> Did you ever think to try closing the other long enough to get it to install?
> Have you been trying to use the same profile for multiple versions? Have you
> tried virgin profiles? Visit irc://moznet/#firefox or
> irc://moznet/#mozillazine or irc://moznet/#seamonkey and people who know what
> it takes will help you get it going.
>
>> I'd load FF3 in a vmware image, or maybe test it with an Ubuntu 8.04 live CD.
>
> Absolutely unnecessary gross overkill.
>
>> Release Candidate 1 is out now, so hopefully things will get more
>> stable when Ubuntu picks it up, but at the moment it's a world of pain
>> - at least for my configuration!
>
> I've been running various flavors of alpha & beta Gecko products simultaneous
> with release versions of same cross-platform (Linux, OS/2 & Win; adding OS X
> recently) for over 7 years. If you can't get it to work routinely, you're not
> correctly following directions, or have a general system problem. Using
> multiple versions does require the MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1 environment variable, or
> equivalent command line option, plus multiple profiles.
>
> Realize that SeaMonkey and Firefox are just different faces on the same
> rendering engine, so you can take the easy way out and just run the devel
> version of one and the release version of the other if following the multiple
> version instructions is somehow not doable for you.
> --
> ". . . . in everything, do to others what you would
> have them do to you . . . ."   Matthew 7:12 NIV
>
>  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>
> Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>



-- 
Kornelis Sietsma korny at my surname dot com
kornys at gmail dot com on google chat -- kornys on skype
"we do what we must, because we can"


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[Felix Miata]

On 2008/05/20 18:27 (GMT+1000) Korny Sietsma apparently typed:

> I have had problems running FF2 on a machine also running FF3 -
> specifically, and fatally for me, FireBug wouldn't install cleanly in
> FF2 if I had FF3 running.

Did you ever think to try closing the other long enough to get it to install?
Have you been trying to use the same profile for multiple versions? Have you
tried virgin profiles? Visit irc://moznet/#firefox or
irc://moznet/#mozillazine or irc://moznet/#seamonkey and people who know what
it takes will help you get it going.

> I'd load FF3 in a vmware image, or maybe test it with an Ubuntu 8.04 live CD.

Absolutely unnecessary gross overkill.

> Release Candidate 1 is out now, so hopefully things will get more
> stable when Ubuntu picks it up, but at the moment it's a world of pain
> - at least for my configuration!

I've been running various flavors of alpha & beta Gecko products simultaneous
with release versions of same cross-platform (Linux, OS/2 & Win; adding OS X
recently) for over 7 years. If you can't get it to work routinely, you're not
correctly following directions, or have a general system problem. Using
multiple versions does require the MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1 environment variable, or
equivalent command line option, plus multiple profiles.

Realize that SeaMonkey and Firefox are just different faces on the same
rendering engine, so you can take the easy way out and just run the devel
version of one and the release version of the other if following the multiple
version instructions is somehow not doable for you.
-- 
". . . . in everything, do to others what you would
have them do to you . . . ."   Matthew 7:12 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[Patrick Lauke]

> Korny Sietsma

> Release Candidate 1 is out now, so hopefully things will get more
> stable when Ubuntu picks it up, but at the moment it's a world of pain
> - at least for my configuration!

Beta5 and RC1 have been rock-solid on my systems (WinXP). And, as far as I 
understand, RC1 is fairly feature complete (with regards to its rendering 
engine), unless some major howlers are reported in the next few weeks. From 
experience, the majority of instability / weird behaviour in these situations 
comes from reuse of an old profile...when jumping to a major new version, I'd 
always advise to start with a completely fresh profile to avoid any 
incompatibilities.

P

Patrick H. Lauke
Web Editor
Enterprise & Development
University of Salford
Room 113, Faraday House
Salford, Greater Manchester
M5 4WT
UK

T +44 (0) 161 295 4779
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

www.salford.ac.uk

A GREATER MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY  


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[Korny Sietsma]

I have had problems running FF2 on a machine also running FF3 -
specifically, and fatally for me, FireBug wouldn't install cleanly in
FF2 if I had FF3 running.

I'd load FF3 in a vmware image, or maybe test it with an Ubuntu 8.04 live CD.

Note that beta 5 at least is still rather unstable.  I've managed to
crash it semi-regularly - somewhere the combination of Gmail,
Campfire, and Firebug (I have to run an alpha of Firebug to get FF3
support) makes the browser die.  I'm not sure which of these is the
actual culprit, or if it's some combination, but clicking on a folder
in gmail, sometimes, kills the browser; and firebug itself often goes
into la-la land.

Release Candidate 1 is out now, so hopefully things will get more
stable when Ubuntu picks it up, but at the moment it's a world of pain
- at least for my configuration!

- Korny

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008/05/20 15:13 (GMT+1200) Paul Bennett apparently typed:
>
>> Ack!
>> Anyone else had horrible problems installing FF3?
>
> No, but ...
>
>> My install crashes every time I open it, so I had to reinstall FF2..
>
> I avoid "installing" applications whenever possible. In the case of
> unreleased Gecko products, it's more than just possible, it's often 
> preferable.
>
> Get yourself an archive build instead of an installer build from
> http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-trunk/ and see
> if you have better luck.
>
> There's no reason you can't have both on the same machine at the same time,
> though an extra step or three are required to enable using both at the same
> time, and you're probably better off not using a profile previously used with
> FF3 to use with FF2.
> --
> ". . . . in everything, do to others what you would
> have them do to you . . . ."   Matthew 7:12 NIV
>
>  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>
> Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>



-- 
Kornelis Sietsma korny at my surname dot com
kornys at gmail dot com on google chat -- kornys on skype
"we do what we must, because we can"


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[Felix Miata]

On 2008/05/20 15:13 (GMT+1200) Paul Bennett apparently typed:

> Ack!
> Anyone else had horrible problems installing FF3?

No, but ...

> My install crashes every time I open it, so I had to reinstall FF2..

I avoid "installing" applications whenever possible. In the case of
unreleased Gecko products, it's more than just possible, it's often preferable.

Get yourself an archive build instead of an installer build from
http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-trunk/ and see
if you have better luck.

There's no reason you can't have both on the same machine at the same time,
though an extra step or three are required to enable using both at the same
time, and you're probably better off not using a profile previously used with
FF3 to use with FF2.
-- 
". . . . in everything, do to others what you would
have them do to you . . . ."   Matthew 7:12 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[Paul Bennett]

Ack!
Anyone else had horrible problems installing FF3?

My install crashes every time I open it, so I had to reinstall FF2..



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[Michael Horowitz]

If its a Beta I would say wait until its done before rewriting anything 
that is currently W3C CSS compliant.   Remember beta means not done.  If 
you are interested in judging beta releases test it an decide why its 
breaking.  Are you currently fulfilling W3C standards.  If you are and 
its breaking it would sound like the beta has a bug than your code 
having a bug.  Does your site pass the validator.


It does look like they are expecting the final release in June

The Mozilla team has not specified a final ship date for Firefox 3 but 
sources in the linux distribution community say they were promised final 
copies in June.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2450

The project site http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox3

Here are the release notes
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/3.0rc1/releasenotes/




Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
561-394-9079



David Dorward wrote:


On 19 May 2008, at 10:37, kevin mcmonagle wrote:

Recently it was pointed out to me that a site I built is breaking in 
firefox 3 beta five.

How close is this to release?


RC1 just came out

Do i need to worry about this? the site works fine in current 
browsers-firefox and otherwise.


I'd be concerned.




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5

[David Dorward]

On 19 May 2008, at 10:37, kevin mcmonagle wrote:

Recently it was pointed out to me that a site I built is breaking in  
firefox 3 beta five.

How close is this to release?


RC1 just came out

Do i need to worry about this? the site works fine in current  
browsers-firefox and otherwise.


I'd be concerned.

--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox skips dropdown and multi-select list with tabbing (?)

[David Dorward]

On 4 May 2008, at 12:57, tee wrote:

I'd just noticed that Firefox skips the dropdown and multi-select  
list with tabbing.

Anybody knows if there is a workround?



I assume you are using a Mac?

Go into the OS X System Preferences, then Keyboard & Mouse, then  
Keyboard and set Full keyboard access to All controls.


--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox skips dropdown and multi-select list with tabbing (?)

[David Dorward]

On 7 May 2008, at 14:54, Scott Limmer wrote:

Using the tabindex attribute on form elements should allow you to  
specify the tab order.



This shouldn't help, and is likely to add confusion if there is  
anything on the page other than form controls.


--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox skips dropdown and multi-select list with tabbing (?)

[Scott Limmer]

Using the tabindex attribute on form elements should allow you to specify
the tab order.


On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 9:57 PM, tee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'd just noticed that Firefox skips the dropdown and multi-select list
> with tabbing.
> Anybody knows if there is a workround?
>
> Thanks!
>
> tee
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox developer toolbar

[Jens-Uwe Korff]

>Does the web developer toolbar support Firefox 3.0 beta 3?

Here's a beta for the beta:
 
http://jefim.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/webdeveloper-add-on-for-firefox-3-
beta-2/
 
Cheers,
 
Jens Korff

The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying files is 
or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, 
dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or any 
attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to copyright. No part of 
it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written consent of 
the copyright owner. If you have received this e-mail in error please advise 
the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and delete all copies. 
Fairfax does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information 
contained in this e-mail or attached files. Internet communications are not 
secure, therefore Fairfax does not accept legal responsibility for the contents 
of this message or attached files.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox developer toolbar

[Keryx Web]

krugonN skrev:

If I remember right in the FAQ he says that he only makes the toolbar 
once the final version is released. So until FF3 final is released his 
toolbar won't be available :(


More detailed: http://chrispederick.com/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=6796#p6796

Summary: He is working on FFox 3 support. (I can't wait. As soon as I 
have Web Developer and Firebug I'll switch for good. Fangs would be good 
too, but I do not use it daily.)



Lars Gunther


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox developer toolbar

[krugonN]

On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Ben Dodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> At present, no it doesn't - Hopefully it will do soon though!  You can
> keep up to date at the authors website at http://chrispederick.com/
>
> Ben
> --
> e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> w: http://bendodson.com/
>
>
>
>
>
> On 08/03/2008, Hayden's Harness Attachment <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I hope this is not off topic. I have the web developer toolbar working
> > great with Firefox 2.x. Does the web developer toolbar support Firefox
> > 3.0 beta 3?
> >
> > Angus MacKinnon
> > Infoforce Services
> > http:ééwww.infoforce-services.com
> >
> > It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.
> > George Washington
> >
> >
> >
> > ***
> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ***
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>

If I remember right in the FAQ he says that he only makes the toolbar once
the final version is released. So until FF3 final is released his toolbar
won't be available :(

Gonzalo González Mora


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox developer toolbar

[Ben Dodson]

At present, no it doesn't - Hopefully it will do soon though!  You can keep
up to date at the authors website at http://chrispederick.com/

Ben
-- 
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w: http://bendodson.com/




On 08/03/2008, Hayden's Harness Attachment <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I hope this is not off topic. I have the web developer toolbar working
> great with Firefox 2.x. Does the web developer toolbar support Firefox 
> 3.0beta 3?
>
> Angus MacKinnon
> Infoforce Services
> http:ééwww.infoforce-services.com
>
> It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.
> George Washington
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

[Breton Slivka]

It's a bit pedantic, but it's actually IE that has this wrong. Since
Firefox's ecmascript implementation is the basis for the ecmascript
standard- any deviation from firefox that IE exhibits is by definition
breaking the standard. Cute eh?


On Nov 22, 2007 10:12 AM, Karl Lurman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Firefox is also a little naughty when it comes to Javascript parsing.
> A friend of mine pointed out how he always gets caught out when
> declaring objects in JSON:
>
> var JsonObject{
>  objectFunction:function() {
>  // blah
>  }, // extra comma here...
> }
>
> Firefox will happily parse this object without complaint, while IE
> will throw a syntax error. The syntax error may rear its head in
> firefox if you minify your Javascript. All of a sudden, your
> once-working Javascript will start to fail in Firefox too...
>
> Karl
>
>
> On Nov 22, 2007 5:22 AM, Kurt Lovelace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > James' advice is it -- there are gobs of  plug-ins for FireFox.
> >
> > There are plug-ins to not only validate HTML but whole singular
> > toolkits for working with the entire plethora of site spewage:
> > cookies, CSS, images, links, Id tags, div orders, stack levels,
> > anchors, block sizes, frames, headers, deprecated elements, feed
> > validation, section 508 validation, Dom inspectors, speed reports, etc
> > cetera.
> >
> > One FireFix plug-in does it all: Web Developer by Chris Pederick
> > located at
> >
> > Http://www.chrispederick.com/work/web-developer
> >
> > Is the über-plugin you are wanting.
> >
> > I routinely use it to deconstruct sites and quickly resolve issues.
> >
> > Regarding closed tags...not all need closing. Let not my comment start
> > a spec war discussion please.
> >
> > The Best,
> >
> > -=KuRt=-
> >
> > Kurt Lovelace
> > MindRoot Media Inc
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Nov 21, 2007, at 9:54 AM, Chris Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I build websites on a Mac and have to check my websites on another
> > > machine in order to view them in IE.
> > >
> > > I experience the usual issues with IE applying css differently than
> > > Firefox but my biggest frustrations, lately, have come from errors
> > > in my html that Firefox has happily ignored but IE has faithfully
> > > shown up.
> > >
> > > Its traditional to knock IE6 for its non-compliance but its done a
> > > good job of validating my html lately.
> > >
> > > I would like to get my Firefox to toughen up and show up errors in
> > > the html without having to submit it to a validator?
> > >
> > > The problem usually comes from missing closing tags.
> > >
> > > Kind Regards
> > > --
> > > Chris Price
> > >
> > > Choctaw
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://www.choctaw.co.uk
> > >
> > > Tel. 01524 825 245
> > > Mob. 0777 451 4488
> > >
> > > Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder
> > > while Excellence is in the Hand of the Professional
> > >
> > > ~~~
> > > -+- Sent on behalf of Choctaw Media Ltd -+-
> > > ~~~
> > >
> > > Choctaw Media Limited is a company
> > > registered in England and Wales
> > > with company number 04627649
> > >
> > > Registered Office:
> > > Lonsdale Partners,
> > > Priory Close,
> > > St Mary's Gate,
> > > Lancaster LA1 1XB
> > > United Kingdom
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ***
> > > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > ***
> > >
> >
> >
> > ***
> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ***
> >
> >
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

[Michael MD]

James Leslie wrote:

You could try using a plug-in such as HTML validator for Firefox that
will put a little icon on the bottom right of your firefox browser to
show you if a page is valid or not and it will show you errors too. It
uses the HTML tidy software

http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/



Tidy can be run on the command line too ... nice and easy - no install 
hassles








***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

[Karl Lurman]

Firefox is also a little naughty when it comes to Javascript parsing.
A friend of mine pointed out how he always gets caught out when
declaring objects in JSON:

var JsonObject{
 objectFunction:function() {
 // blah
 }, // extra comma here...
}

Firefox will happily parse this object without complaint, while IE
will throw a syntax error. The syntax error may rear its head in
firefox if you minify your Javascript. All of a sudden, your
once-working Javascript will start to fail in Firefox too...

Karl

On Nov 22, 2007 5:22 AM, Kurt Lovelace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James' advice is it -- there are gobs of  plug-ins for FireFox.
>
> There are plug-ins to not only validate HTML but whole singular
> toolkits for working with the entire plethora of site spewage:
> cookies, CSS, images, links, Id tags, div orders, stack levels,
> anchors, block sizes, frames, headers, deprecated elements, feed
> validation, section 508 validation, Dom inspectors, speed reports, etc
> cetera.
>
> One FireFix plug-in does it all: Web Developer by Chris Pederick
> located at
>
> Http://www.chrispederick.com/work/web-developer
>
> Is the über-plugin you are wanting.
>
> I routinely use it to deconstruct sites and quickly resolve issues.
>
> Regarding closed tags...not all need closing. Let not my comment start
> a spec war discussion please.
>
> The Best,
>
> -=KuRt=-
>
> Kurt Lovelace
> MindRoot Media Inc
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 21, 2007, at 9:54 AM, Chris Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
> > I build websites on a Mac and have to check my websites on another
> > machine in order to view them in IE.
> >
> > I experience the usual issues with IE applying css differently than
> > Firefox but my biggest frustrations, lately, have come from errors
> > in my html that Firefox has happily ignored but IE has faithfully
> > shown up.
> >
> > Its traditional to knock IE6 for its non-compliance but its done a
> > good job of validating my html lately.
> >
> > I would like to get my Firefox to toughen up and show up errors in
> > the html without having to submit it to a validator?
> >
> > The problem usually comes from missing closing tags.
> >
> > Kind Regards
> > --
> > Chris Price
> >
> > Choctaw
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.choctaw.co.uk
> >
> > Tel. 01524 825 245
> > Mob. 0777 451 4488
> >
> > Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder
> > while Excellence is in the Hand of the Professional
> >
> > ~~~
> > -+- Sent on behalf of Choctaw Media Ltd -+-
> > ~~~
> >
> > Choctaw Media Limited is a company
> > registered in England and Wales
> > with company number 04627649
> >
> > Registered Office:
> > Lonsdale Partners,
> > Priory Close,
> > St Mary's Gate,
> > Lancaster LA1 1XB
> > United Kingdom
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ***
> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ***
> >
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

[Kurt Lovelace]

James' advice is it -- there are gobs of  plug-ins for FireFox.

There are plug-ins to not only validate HTML but whole singular  
toolkits for working with the entire plethora of site spewage:  
cookies, CSS, images, links, Id tags, div orders, stack levels,  
anchors, block sizes, frames, headers, deprecated elements, feed  
validation, section 508 validation, Dom inspectors, speed reports, etc  
cetera.


One FireFix plug-in does it all: Web Developer by Chris Pederick  
located at


Http://www.chrispederick.com/work/web-developer

Is the über-plugin you are wanting.

I routinely use it to deconstruct sites and quickly resolve issues.

Regarding closed tags...not all need closing. Let not my comment start  
a spec war discussion please.


The Best,

-=KuRt=-

Kurt Lovelace
MindRoot Media Inc


Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 21, 2007, at 9:54 AM, Chris Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:


I build websites on a Mac and have to check my websites on another  
machine in order to view them in IE.


I experience the usual issues with IE applying css differently than  
Firefox but my biggest frustrations, lately, have come from errors  
in my html that Firefox has happily ignored but IE has faithfully  
shown up.


Its traditional to knock IE6 for its non-compliance but its done a  
good job of validating my html lately.


I would like to get my Firefox to toughen up and show up errors in  
the html without having to submit it to a validator?


The problem usually comes from missing closing tags.

Kind Regards
--
Chris Price

Choctaw

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.choctaw.co.uk

Tel. 01524 825 245
Mob. 0777 451 4488

Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder
while Excellence is in the Hand of the Professional

~~~
-+- Sent on behalf of Choctaw Media Ltd -+-
~~~

Choctaw Media Limited is a company
registered in England and Wales
with company number 04627649

Registered Office:
Lonsdale Partners,
Priory Close,
St Mary's Gate,
Lancaster LA1 1XB
United Kingdom




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

[David Laakso]

Chris Price wrote:
I build websites on a Mac and have to check my websites on another 
machine in order to view them in IE.


I experience the usual issues with IE applying css differently than 
Firefox but my biggest frustrations, lately, have come from errors in 
my html that Firefox has happily ignored but IE has faithfully shown up.


Its traditional to knock IE6 for its non-compliance but its done a 
good job of validating my html lately.


I would like to get my Firefox to toughen up and show up errors in the 
html without having to submit it to a validator?


The problem usually comes from missing closing tags.

Kind Regards



Code to the latest version of Mac/Opera. Validate. Firefox will follow 
suit. Make /frequent/ "pit-stops" to our good friends IE6 & 7.

Best,
~dL

--
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

[Chris Price]

James Leslie wrote:

You could try using a plug-in such as HTML validator for Firefox that
will put a little icon on the bottom right of your firefox browser to
show you if a page is valid or not and it will show you errors too. It
uses the HTML tidy software

http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/

Hope that helps
  

Thanks James. That's really useful.

Kind Regards
--
Chris Price

Choctaw

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.choctaw.co.uk

Tel. 01524 825 245
Mob. 0777 451 4488

Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder
while Excellence is in the Hand of the Professional

~~~
-+- Sent on behalf of Choctaw Media Ltd -+-
~~~

Choctaw Media Limited is a company
registered in England and Wales
with company number 04627649

Registered Office:
Lonsdale Partners,
Priory Close,
St Mary's Gate,
Lancaster LA1 1XB
United Kingdom




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

[James Leslie]

Hi Chris,

That seems like an odd scenario to me, firefox is pretty tight compared
to IE I thought, but I'll take your word for it :-)

You could try using a plug-in such as HTML validator for Firefox that
will put a little icon on the bottom right of your firefox browser to
show you if a page is valid or not and it will show you errors too. It
uses the HTML tidy software

http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/

Hope that helps

James

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Chris Price
Sent: 21 November 2007 15:54
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

I build websites on a Mac and have to check my websites on another
machine in order to view them in IE.

I experience the usual issues with IE applying css differently than
Firefox but my biggest frustrations, lately, have come from errors in my
html that Firefox has happily ignored but IE has faithfully shown up.

Its traditional to knock IE6 for its non-compliance but its done a good
job of validating my html lately.

I would like to get my Firefox to toughen up and show up errors in the
html without having to submit it to a validator?

The problem usually comes from missing closing tags.

Kind Regards
--
Chris Price




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox is a pushover

[Lars Michael Sørensen]

I would begin by installing Firebug and Yslow extensions in FF.
There's also a HTML validator based on Tidy that could be handy, but
you get the same level of validation w/ Firebug so no need to install
both (although I happen to have).

Other extensions worth having: Web developer Toolbar. I think there's
also a IE version.

/lmss

2007/11/21, Chris Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I build websites on a Mac and have to check my websites on another
> machine in order to view them in IE.
>
> I experience the usual issues with IE applying css differently than
> Firefox but my biggest frustrations, lately, have come from errors in my
> html that Firefox has happily ignored but IE has faithfully shown up.
>
> Its traditional to knock IE6 for its non-compliance but its done a good
> job of validating my html lately.
>
> I would like to get my Firefox to toughen up and show up errors in the
> html without having to submit it to a validator?
>
> The problem usually comes from missing closing tags.
>
> Kind Regards
> --
> Chris Price
>
> Choctaw
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.choctaw.co.uk
>
> Tel. 01524 825 245
> Mob. 0777 451 4488
>
> Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder
> while Excellence is in the Hand of the Professional
>
> ~~~
> -+- Sent on behalf of Choctaw Media Ltd -+-
> ~~~
>
> Choctaw Media Limited is a company
> registered in England and Wales
> with company number 04627649
>
> Registered Office:
> Lonsdale Partners,
> Priory Close,
> St Mary's Gate,
> Lancaster LA1 1XB
> United Kingdom
>
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Julián Landerreche]

> To look at the issue laterally, if your fixed-width table requires
> thatlong links wrap, why invoke the no-wrap rule at all? Obviously this
> snippet gives no clue as to the broader context, but what if you leave
> white-space at its default setting of normal - by omitting it?
>

The context is: an HTML newsletter (designed for looking good at e-mail
clients) that's also posted in Craigslist. The CSS rule is applied by
craigslist.css, so there is no-way I can avoid that.
Also, I can't apply inline styling to  elements because they are totally
stripped out by CL. That's why I'm applying them to parent and child  of the
 elements (CL doesn't strip them).
That's why i'm using nasty mark-up.

Since you applied the "white-space: normal" to a  element which is not
> >
> > a block-level element it is ignored. By changing the  to a 
> > *or*
> > adding "display:block" to the span's style, you will get the effect you
> > were expecting.
>
>
Ok. Thanks for that one, Kepler! It worked fine.


> And yes that is the expected behaviour. 'Width' on table and td/th is
> > more like 'min-width' (idem dito for 'height').
>
>
Thanks for that one, Philippe. See ya at TxP forums ;)


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Philippe Wittenbergh]

On Aug 29, 2007, at 12:43 PM, Kepler Gelotte wrote:


And if the link text were to long for the space allowed by the table
(e.g. a very very long word), the table should expand, unless the
table has 'table-layout: fixed' specified.


The table should expand even though he specified width="175"? I learn
something new every day.

Try this:


And yes that is the expected behaviour. 'Width' on table and td/th is  
more like 'min-width' (idem dito for 'height').


Philippe
---
Philippe Wittenbergh






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Kepler Gelotte]

> And if the link text were to long for the space allowed by the table  
> (e.g. a very very long word), the table should expand, unless the  
> table has 'table-layout: fixed' specified.

The table should expand even though he specified width="175"? I learn
something new every day.

Regards,
Kepler



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Philippe Wittenbergh]

On Aug 29, 2007, at 10:47 AM, Kepler Gelotte wrote:


I don’t think it is a bug. First of all you are not overriding the
white-space property buy assigning it to child elements or parent  
elements.
You just create a conflict. Then precedence takes affect. According  
to the

CSS2 spec:

'white-space'
Value:  normal | pre | nowrap | inherit
Initial:  normal
Applies to:  block-level elements
Inherited: yes
Percentages:  N/A
Media: visual

Since you applied the “white-space: normal” to a  element  
which is not
a block-level element it is ignored. By changing the  to a  
 *or*
adding “display:block” to the span’s style, you will get the effect  
you were

expecting.


But in the testcase, the white-space property is applied to the   
(in the head: a {white-pace:nowrap})

Firefox 2.0.0.x should _ignore_ that as well.

Anyway, my Gecko trunk builds (Minefield 20070828 and Camino trunk  
build) correctly wrap the text the same way Safari and WebKit wrap  
the text (ignore the white-pace:nowrap).

So Firefox 3.0 will display correctly.

And if the link text were to long for the space allowed by the table  
(e.g. a very very long word), the table should expand, unless the  
table has 'table-layout: fixed' specified.


Philippe
---
Philippe Wittenbergh






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Kepler Gelotte]

Hi, 

I don’t think it is a bug. First of all you are not overriding the
white-space property buy assigning it to child elements or parent elements.
You just create a conflict. Then precedence takes affect. According to the
CSS2 spec:

'white-space' 
Value:  normal | pre | nowrap | inherit 
Initial:  normal 
Applies to:  block-level elements 
Inherited: yes 
Percentages:  N/A 
Media: visual

Since you applied the “white-space: normal” to a  element which is not
a block-level element it is ignored. By changing the  to a  *or*
adding “display:block” to the span’s style, you will get the effect you were
expecting.

Regards,
Kepler



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Julián Landerreche
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

Hi all.
First: sorry, I'm double posting this on two lists so anyone can confirm
this (before reporting to Mozilla).

The issue is simple (you will "see it better" by just creating a testing
html with the snippet below): 

- there is a "white-space:nowrap" property (in the stylesheet) applied to
the  element .
- then, that rule is override with some inline styling applied
("white-space:normal") on two elements: one that wraps the  elements and
one that is wrapped by the  element (that also contains the text). 
- the text  inside the  elements is a very very very long link.
- and the link is inside a table with a fixed with.
- every tested browser (but FF) honors both the width of the table and the
"white-space:normal" applied to both the parent and children of the 
elements. 
- but Firefox just expands the table width and doesn't break the link in
multiple lines as expected.
 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Nick Gleitzman]

Julián Landerreche wrote:


I have tested this in:
 - Firefox 2.0.0.6 (both Win and Linux)


Hmm. Not convinced that it's a bug; your line-wrapped link appears as 
you want in FF2.0.0.6/Mac OSX - ?


To look at the issue laterally, if your fixed-width table requires that 
long links wrap, why invoke the no-wrap rule at all? Obviously this 
snippet gives no clue as to the broader context, but what if you leave 
white-space at its default setting of normal - by omitting it?


N
___
omnivision. websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox web developer icons

[Anders Nawroth]

Bojana Lalic skrev:
Where can I find those icons used in the firefox web developer add-on? I 
am after the Disable, Information and Green tick ones.


Not an answer to your question, but this icon set is good and free to use:
http://tango.freedesktop.org/Tango_Icon_Library


/AndersN


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox web developer icons

[Bojana Lalic]

Thank you Casey and Alfonso :)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Alfonso Catron
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 10:53 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Firefox web developer icons

Hi, these are the famfamfam icons library:
http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/

It is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
Unfortunately, their site seems to be unavailable now.

I can send you the files to your mail, please let me know.

regards.

Alfonso

On 6/3/07, Bojana Lalic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Hi all
>
>
>
> Where can I find those icons used in the firefox web developer add-on?
I am
> after the Disable, Information and Green tick ones.
>
> Regards
>
> Bojana
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines:
> http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe:
> http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox web developer icons

[Alfonso Catron]

Hi, these are the famfamfam icons library:
http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/

It is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
Unfortunately, their site seems to be unavailable now.

I can send you the files to your mail, please let me know.

regards.

Alfonso

On 6/3/07, Bojana Lalic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:





Hi all



Where can I find those icons used in the firefox web developer add-on? I am
after the Disable, Information and Green tick ones.

Regards

Bojana


***
List Guidelines:
http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***