Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > iCab and table rendering

Reply
Thread Tools

iCab and table rendering

 
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-10-2005
I know few of you would be on Macs and even fewer on OS less than X, but a
curiosity:

iCab has a new beta version out and obviously from the files that come with
the download they have made a big effort to improve their CSS and other past
rendering problems. I am miffed about one issue though, its handling of a
relatively simple table. I have prepared a couple of pages that work fine at
all enlargements in my Mozilla 1.3.1 and IE 5 (on a Mac) but play up in
iCab.

The pictures get out of vertical alignment in iCab when one enlarges the
fonts as a browser user. It has something to do with the way it handles the
text, the break tag? I cannot pick it. Is it a browser bug?

http://dorayme.150m.com/iCabProblem/photographs.html

and to turn off my css stylesheet:

http://dorayme.150m.com/iCabProblem/...aphsNoCSS.html

which seems to indicate that the problem is not due to any the linked css

There is a screenshot of the trouble (which is mild form of it) at

http://dorayme.150m.com/iCabProblem/icabScreenshot.jpg

I am not aware of any trouble of this kind in any other browser. There are
doubtless better ways of marking up and CSSing but I am curious as to what
is going on in iCab on this lot?

dorayme

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Leonard Blaisdell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2005
In article <BEF7F2F9.14638%(E-Mail Removed)>,
dorayme <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I am not aware of any trouble of this kind in any other browser. There are
> doubtless better ways of marking up and CSSing but I am curious as to what
> is going on in iCab on this lot?


I'm a Mac user too. I loved many aspects of iCab that are unlike any
other browser out there. But they have been late with CSS support. Very
late, and I believe that they missed their very first CSS deadline by
months and months.
Browsers are complicated programs, and I think that I'd put them in 20th
place as a browser I felt I had to support. Consider the first line of
their website that states "The development of iCab is not fully finished
yet".
Having said that, I still want iCab to smile. I have found that a
smiling iCab can still render a site "not necessarily to iCab's
advantage".
I hope the developers make a ton of money out of some of their
innovative ideas, but I wouldn't worry about how a site looks in iCab.

leo

--
<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2005
> From: Leonard Blaisdell <(E-Mail Removed)>
>
> In article <BEF7F2F9.14638%(E-Mail Removed)>,
> dorayme <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I am not aware of any trouble of this kind in any other browser. There are
>> doubtless better ways of marking up and CSSing but I am curious as to what
>> is going on in iCab on this lot? ...

>
> I wouldn't worry about how a site looks in iCab.



More curious than worried...

dorayme

 
Reply With Quote
 
kchayka
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2005
dorayme wrote:
>
> iCab has a new beta version out...
> I am miffed about one issue though, its handling of a
> relatively simple table.


Did you already forget that it's a *beta* version?

Why don't you send a bug report to the iCab folks?

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Leonard Blaisdell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2005
In article <BEF80FC2.14641%(E-Mail Removed)>,
dorayme <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > From: Leonard Blaisdell <(E-Mail Removed)>
> >
> > In article <BEF7F2F9.14638%(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > dorayme <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


> > I wouldn't worry about how a site looks in iCab.


> More curious than worried...


I don't think there are many people versed in iCab that can answer your
questions here. I'm not sure where they might be. Probably not in
comp.sys.mac.*. After all, you're asking about specific iCab webpage
rendering where their rendering problems make up a nearly nonexistent
problem for the Web as a whole. Have you checked with them somewhere on
the iCab site? That would be your best bet if they answer.
I really don't believe that viewing what you've done, unless iCab
doesn't smile, will reveal problems you may have. In the past, they
could give your site a green light while rendering poorly markup that
was acceptable to (nearly) every other modern browser.
Forgive me but I think you may be tilting at windmills on this specific
issue.
By the way, I'm finally running OSX and have purchased a real Earth time
zone visualizer program. I see you're still in full daylight unlike our
friends in Europe other than Scandanavia. Not a plug, but a revelation
for me. Our sun is going down

leo

--
<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/
 
Reply With Quote
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2005
> From: kchayka <(E-Mail Removed)>
>
> dorayme wrote:
>>
>> iCab has a new beta version out...
>> I am miffed about one issue though, its handling of a
>> relatively simple table.

>
> Did you already forget that it's a *beta* version?
>
> Why don't you send a bug report to the iCab folks?
>


No I did not forget this. And a couple of hours back I did send such a
report or query to iCab. I thought that folk on this group might know if it
is not just me being mistaken over my html and css. I assume that you
probably know about as much as anyone in the world and more than even the
iCab folk about some of these matters. You see, you are rightly more
confident than me on these matters (I hate to flatter you so because you
have been so horrible to me. But the facts are the facts).

And I thought it might interest you. Allow me to say a couple of things that
are actually relevant to alt.html instead of my terrible record of going off
the track... You should encourage this behaviour more



dorayme

 
Reply With Quote
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2005
> From: Leonard Blaisdell <(E-Mail Removed)>
>
> dorayme <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>> From: Leonard Blaisdell <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>
>>> In article <BEF7F2F9.14638%(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>> dorayme <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>>> I wouldn't worry about how a site looks in iCab.

>
>> More curious than worried...

>
> I don't think there are many people versed in iCab that can answer your
> questions here.


I am not sure about this, they may not need to be versed in iCab to see what
might be going on... Some of them are quite clever in spite of not being in
the Mac world...

dorayme



 
Reply With Quote
 
kchayka
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2005
dorayme wrote:
>> From: kchayka <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>
>> Why don't you send a bug report to the iCab folks?

>
> And a couple of hours back I did send such a
> report or query to iCab. I thought that folk on this group might know if it
> is not just me being mistaken over my html and css.


If--out of iCab3 (beta), Opera7+, gecko, Safari and even IE6--only iCab
is rendering strangely, I'd be inclined to call it an issue with iCab,
especially if the code validates. I'd change my mind only if the specs
clearly state that iCab is right, but I probably wouldn't go to the
trouble of looking it up.

No matter how good iCab (eventually) turns out to be, I doubt it will
ever make any serious impact, mostly because they are so late entering
the CSS game. For most sites, Mac users are just a teeny percent to
begin with, iCab users are a teeny percent of that. Perhaps some day
that will change, but now it's not worth the effort to debug any
rendering issues iCab might have, especially if it's the only browser
showing a problem, and even more especially if it's just a cosmetic
difference like in your table.

> I hate to flatter you so because you
> have been so horrible to me.


I don't recall any specific instances, but I admit some days I can be
rather less diplomatic than others. I don't mean negative comments
personally. Do remember to wear your flame-retardant teflon suit when
you come here, eh?

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
 
Reply With Quote
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2005
> From: kchayka <(E-Mail Removed)>
>
> dorayme wrote:
>>> From: kchayka <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>
>>> Why don't you send a bug report to the iCab folks?

>>
>> And a couple of hours back I did send such a
>> report or query to iCab. I thought that folk on this group might know if it
>> is not just me being mistaken over my html and css.

>
> If--out of iCab3 (beta), Opera7+, gecko, Safari and even IE6--only iCab
> is rendering strangely, I'd be inclined to call it an issue with iCab,
> especially if the code validates. I'd change my mind only if the specs
> clearly state that iCab is right, but I probably wouldn't go to the
> trouble of looking it up.
>
> No matter how good iCab (eventually) turns out to be, I doubt it will
> ever make any serious impact, mostly because they are so late entering
> the CSS game. For most sites, Mac users are just a teeny percent to
> begin with, iCab users are a teeny percent of that. Perhaps some day
> that will change, but now it's not worth the effort to debug any
> rendering issues iCab might have, especially if it's the only browser
> showing a problem, and even more especially if it's just a cosmetic
> difference like in your table.
>


This all sounds fair enough to me. Mac folk, you will appreciate, must just
keep trying to punch above their weight!

Will see what iCab people say. As a browser to use for real browsing this
beta has other faults that are discouraging, like strange ugly rendering of
the fonts no matter the obvious settings in preferences. But it also has
features that are *very attractive*. Eg. For testing and developing, the
face that scowls various unhappy colours at bad mark up or css. One tries to
at least for green (it is happy then) for starters; if not green, a click
reviews all the things one should look at like silly mistakes and more
serious, both in the html and the css (this *css* diagnostic capability is
new for iCab).

And one thing alone makes it irresistible on my set up (OS 9.1): source code
of any site comes up in one's own text editor. In particular, the actual
source files on my machine are brought up for my own sites. I know it is
different in various ways on PCs and there are different ways of working,
but on my system, there is no such direct way with other browsers.

It is so frustrating that all the good things can't be in one browser! It is
obviously a very hard thing to achieve given commercial realities and other
things. I suspect all this is because I (along with you lot as technical
advisers on very high pay) am not there at the elbow of the developers. When
I am king, believe me, things are going to be very different.

dorayme



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Table rendering difference in Firefox and IE ami.aga@gmail.com HTML 1 08-04-2008 10:01 PM
IE6 SP1 rendering vs IE6 SP2 rendering Peter Mount HTML 4 01-31-2006 08:01 AM
Another disadvantage with frames, at least on iCab... dorayme HTML 11 09-21-2005 10:45 AM
Table/table rows/table data tag question? Rio HTML 4 11-05-2004 08:11 AM
Could not load type VTFixup Table from assembly Invalid token in v-table fix-up table. David Williams ASP .Net 2 08-12-2003 07:55 AM



Advertisments