Something is still
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Paul Allen Newell pnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
On 8/8/2011 12:42 AM, Andras Simon wrote:
w3c's html validator is unlikely to signal problems with your javascript (and no validator could if the problem is not a syntactic one).
Andras:
Thanks for reply.
Regarding the validator, your comment was/is understood before I wrote my email ...
Not quite, perhaps.
I mentioned it only to ensure that I wasn't tripping up on bad html that validator would pick up. Using 4.01 Strict, if it matters.
Well, outside the fact that even strictly standard html provides hooks for conformant ways to add non-conformant tags, yeah, conformance matters.
The web standards have been open-ended from the beginning on purpose. It's a kind of hidden sub-text in the discussions, one of those proverbial elephants in the room. (Confused me for a long time, too.)
It's probably not a Win XP vs Fedora but an IE vs Firefox question. Have you tried FF on Win XP? Or other browsers on Fedora?
Andras
Everything is in Firefox on Win XP and F14 (don't want cliched apples and oranges problem by dealing with IE). Both systems are running Firefox 3.6.18 (Windows XP is 32bit, F14 is both 32 and 64).
Paul
Direct-X?
Even two distinct installs of Fedora 14 are likely to have distinct sets of libraries installed, and the java/ECMAscript interface to the OS libraries is a bit fuzzy.
It goes without saying that you must have checked that you have the same set of add-ons loaded in each. Right?
Shoot. Without a look at your source code, I would be hard-pressed to even suggest a proper forum for you among those that are dedicated to the various ways to mix HTML, CSS, ECMAscript, server-side tech, and so forth.
Joel Res