Howdy_McGee Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Ok, so i'm making this website right. Whenever I put it online and check it out through Internet Explorer it looks all messed up, but when I download the files off my server and check it out on my local computer it looks perfect on IE. Anyone know whats going on here and how to fix it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 what exactly do you mean by messed up? Are your filepath's correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdy_McGee Posted July 8, 2010 Author Share Posted July 8, 2010 Whats happening is that my website is getting a bunch of extra padding and images are being moved etc. But when I take off compatibility mode the page looks perfect. I need to find a script or something of the sort that makes sure their compatibility mode is turned off in Internet Explorer. It looks TERRIBLE w/ compatibility mode turned on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 are you using a strict DTD and validating your code? Forcing people's browsers into certain rendering views is definitely not the solution. The solution is just to write a good webpage that works well in all browsers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdy_McGee Posted July 8, 2010 Author Share Posted July 8, 2010 that's true, but I can't get valid code since i'm doing dropdown menus using CSS. ULs inside of LIs etc. Plus its taking the margining and padding differently through all browsers. It would look perfect in all browsers if Internet Explorers compatibility mode is off... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fmdpa Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Make sure you have a DOCTYPE specified. Internet Explorer can be picky about that sometimes. Also, try using a validator on your pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 that's true, but I can't get valid code since i'm doing dropdown menus using CSS. ULs inside of LIs etc. Plus its taking the margining and padding differently through all browsers. It would look perfect in all browsers if Internet Explorers compatibility mode is off...it would look (very close to) perfect if it had a Strict DOCTYPE, which you didn't answer. Also, you can use the universal selector to reset all page elements to have 0px margins and paddings, and then just explicitely set them yourself as needed. Last time I checked you can make CSS doprdowns that validate. Here's a site full of them:http://www.cssplay.co.uk/menus/final_drop.htmlthat page alone has an example on it of a three tier drop down menu that validates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gex Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 To be honest thought.. IE tends to mess up layouts anyway. Especially with the CSS float command. Best to just create a layout that works well in most browsers and resolutions. Personally I only build in Firefox, less picky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 To be honest thought.. IE tends to mess up layouts anyway. Especially with the CSS float command. Best to just create a layout that works well in most browsers and resolutions. Personally I only build in Firefox, less picky.IE can mess them up, but as long as you use a Strict DTD (along with validation) you can pretty much eliminate most of the inconsistencies. You can even use the universal (reset) selector for even more fine tune precision and control. Just developing in FF will not make your problems go away, although it's a good place to start. Unfortunately the truth is a lot of people use IE and multiple browser options won't ever go away. Following conventions and good practices will surely eliminate all but the most specific edge cases of web site development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gex Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 IE can mess them up, but as long as you use a Strict DTD (along with validation) you can pretty much eliminate most of the inconsistencies. You can even use the universal (reset) selector for even more fine tune precision and control. Just developing in FF will not make your problems go away, although it's a good place to start. Unfortunately the truth is a lot of people use IE and multiple browser options won't ever go away. Following conventions and good practices will surely eliminate all but the most specific edge cases of web site development.Ah I see. Never thought much on the Strict DTD I've always been a Transitional man. And yeah unfortunatly most people still do use IE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdy_McGee Posted July 9, 2010 Author Share Posted July 9, 2010 I've never really understood doc types, what's the difference between strict and transitional? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gex Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 I've never really understood doc types, what's the difference between strict and transitional?You can have a look here which lists all teh different Doctypes. http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_doctype.aspBut generally strict has more attributes I think and if the above statement is correct works better with browsers. While transitional is more loose and allows more depricated stuff to come into play. I dont fully understand them myself I just know that I should use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 You can have a look here which lists all teh different Doctypes. http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_doctype.aspBut generally strict has more attributes I think and if the above statement is correct works better with browsers. While transitional is more loose and allows more depricated stuff to come into play. I dont fully understand them myself I just know that I should use them.That's more or less the gist of it. strict doctypes force browsers to render to current standards and with non-deprecated tags. Transitional was only meant as a way for old websites to be grandfathered in to the current conventions of modern webdesign. It was meant for backwards compatibility; certainly not for sites just being freshly developed. Think of it like building codes. There are certain standards by which builders have to conform to in order to be approved for a building permit (or else face stiff fines/penalties, being shut down, etc). Certain buildings can circumnavigate this by be being really, really, really, really, old. But no governing body is going to approve a modern day building permit if their using standards from 100 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gex Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 That's more or less the gist of it. strict doctypes force browsers to render to current standards and with non-deprecated tags. Transitional was only meant as a way for old websites to be grandfathered in to the current conventions of modern webdesign. It was meant for backwards compatibility; certainly not for sites just being freshly developed. Think of it like building codes. There are certain standards by which builders have to conform to in order to be approved for a building permit (or else face stiff fines/penalties, being shut down, etc). Certain buildings can circumnavigate this by be being really, really, really, really, old. But no governing body is going to approve a modern day building permit if their using standards from 100 years ago.Ah I see so Strict is the DTD that should be used on most newer websites as it conforms to the standards needed for the lastest browsers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 note: it defines the standards by which browsers should follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdy_McGee Posted July 12, 2010 Author Share Posted July 12, 2010 What about a XHTML doctype? Which would be better to use?<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd"> versus<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 why not read about it and decide? http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/default.aspfor the most part, unless you need to parse XML, HTML DTD's will be sufficient for most application, although I prefer the cleaner syntax of XHTML. However, once the HTML5 draft is complete, I don't think there will be a need for such a choice anymore, as it aim to wrap all their specifications up in one. I'm sure some others will chime in on that point however, so stay tuned for more info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.