html on Fedora -- looking for "where to go"

[Joel Rees]

Something is still

On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Paul Allen Newell <pnewell at 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