Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > Does this page work in your Firefox?

Reply
Thread Tools

Does this page work in your Firefox?

 
 
Bone Ur
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007
Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 29 Nov 2007 21:47:50
GMT Mika scribed:

> "Bone Ur" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Xns99F794483B759boneurhyphe@85.214.90.236...
>>
>> Regarding this markup which you proclaim works, have you checked it
>> against every possibly condition under which it should work as it
>> supposedly does?

>
> Yes.
>
>> Whatever, I am tired of arguing about this and I'm sure you are, too.
>> I will concede that pages can sometimes function in general with
>> certain

>
> No, they all function perfectly in all supported browsers now.
>
>> invalid markup - you see it all the times on The Web. However, that
>> doesn't give an author who knows better any excuse to create such a
>> page, and a valid solution should be found rather than relying on
>> empirical conditions.

>
> Why? That is just unnecessary work and expense to fix something that
> isn't broken. If it works, don't mend it.
>
>>> Long live the Queen!

>>
>> Nothing against the current monarch, but I think I actually prefer a
>> King.

>
> I don't think you've actually agreed with a single point I've ever
> raised here.


So? I usually don't agree with these other jamokes here, either.

> If I said black was white, you'd probably try to explain
> that it is grey.


Phhfft! Salt-and-pepper, obviously...

> Shall we leave it alone now lol?!


Yeah. Since your sense of humor has been so radically diminished by
guilt over your website, that's probably the best course of action for a
culpable prudish prune of a Brit to follow, anyway.

--
Bone Ur
Cavemen have formidable pheromones.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bone Ur
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007
Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:35:21 GMT
Blinky the Shark scribed:

> Bone Ur wrote:
>
>> Nothing against the current monarch, but I think I actually prefer a
>> King. There's just something about calling someone in bloomers "Your
>> majesty" which goes against the grain. 'Course, I s'pose ol' queenie
>> could be prancing 'round the palace without proper panties, but that
>> still doesn't change my opinion of ruling royal genders.

>
> http://www.lifeisajoke.com/Celebriti..._elizabeth.jpg


Ooey gooey - boogars and white gloves! Now I know what they mean by
decadence.

--
Bone Ur
Cavemen have formidable pheromones.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Blinky the Shark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007
Ed Mullen wrote:
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>> Bone Ur wrote:
>>
>>> Nothing against the current monarch, but I think I actually prefer a
>>> King. There's just something about calling someone in bloomers "Your
>>> majesty" which goes against the grain. 'Course, I s'pose ol' queenie
>>> could be prancing 'round the palace without proper panties, but that
>>> still doesn't change my opinion of ruling royal genders.

>>
>> http://www.lifeisajoke.com/Celebriti..._elizabeth.jpg

>
> I am SO glad that wasn't a pic of the queen running around the palace
> without her bloomers on!


I do have a heart.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org
 
Reply With Quote
 
Blinky the Shark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007
Bone Ur wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:35:21 GMT
> Blinky the Shark scribed:
>
>> Bone Ur wrote:
>>
>>> Nothing against the current monarch, but I think I actually prefer a
>>> King. There's just something about calling someone in bloomers "Your
>>> majesty" which goes against the grain. 'Course, I s'pose ol' queenie
>>> could be prancing 'round the palace without proper panties, but that
>>> still doesn't change my opinion of ruling royal genders.

>>
>> http://www.lifeisajoke.com/Celebriti..._elizabeth.jpg

>
> Ooey gooey - boogars and white gloves! Now I know what they mean by
> decadence.


And surely not as good at chiseling out the stubborn ones with The Royal
Fingernail.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org
 
Reply With Quote
 
rf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007

"Ed Mullen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
> Blinky the Shark wrote:


>> http://www.lifeisajoke.com/Celebriti..._elizabeth.jpg

>
> I am SO glad that wasn't a pic of the queen running around the palace
> without her bloomers on!


or off!

--
Richard.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ed Mullen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007
Blinky the Shark wrote:
> Bone Ur wrote:
>> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:35:21 GMT
>> Blinky the Shark scribed:
>>
>>> Bone Ur wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nothing against the current monarch, but I think I actually prefer a
>>>> King. There's just something about calling someone in bloomers "Your
>>>> majesty" which goes against the grain. 'Course, I s'pose ol' queenie
>>>> could be prancing 'round the palace without proper panties, but that
>>>> still doesn't change my opinion of ruling royal genders.
>>> http://www.lifeisajoke.com/Celebriti..._elizabeth.jpg

>>
>> Ooey gooey - boogars and white gloves! Now I know what they mean by
>> decadence.

>
> And surely not as good at chiseling out the stubborn ones with The Royal
> Fingernail.
>


Surely, at some point, Monty Python must have done a routine titled:
"The Royal Booger."

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
Why isn't the word phonetic spelled the way is sounds?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mika
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007

"Norman Peelman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:474f55b1$0$24310$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Mika wrote:
>> "Norman Peelman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:474eb5ac$0$2557$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>>> Ok, where does George St. end? In Opera 9,21 (Linux) I am able to walk
>>> (run) from the intersection of George St. and Red Lion St. all the way
>>> to the 3 way intersection of George St., The Square, and The Quadrant.
>>>
>>> Norm

>>
>> That is correct. George Street works perfectly in Opera, as does
>> Portobello Road as we have said. Oxford Street however does not work
>> correctly in Opera, that is you can only scroll up to House of Fraser.
>> In any other browser you can scroll continuously more than twice as far.

>
> Can confirm that, Opera 9.21 (Linux for me) has a ceiling of 32765px for
> the width of a DIV, after which it does not display. The limit does not
> exist for the height attribute. Even tried setting it with javascript.


Thanks for confirming what we said. We have notified the developers of
Opera so hope they will remove this unnecessary limit. After all, as you
say they don't have it on height.

Mika


 
Reply With Quote
 
Andy Dingley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007
On 29 Nov, 17:44, "Mika" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > I'm in the UK.

>
> > It's still ****.

>
> That is perhaps the most unhelpful info anyone has given to date, and from a
> fellow Brit no less.


Thankyou. Your mistake is to assume that I _intended_ it to be
helpful. The insult was no less deliberate for that.

You're very clearly beyond help. You've receieved a vast amount of it
already, ignored all and ridiculed most of it. Your self-fixated ways
have convinced you that you're already perfectly correct, even in the
face of vast evidence to the contrary. No matter that anyone quite
reasonably tells you is wrong with your horrible behemoth of a site,
you refuse to listen to a word of it. You even ridicule the far more
skilled members of this ng. who've bothered to try and help you.

You're clearly either an idiot, or at least so impervious to advice,
that it's a waste of time to comment further. There will be a gradual
silence descending around you as more and more people drop you quietly
into their killfiles. Why should anyone waste time arguing with a
dullard? We do this a lot, but usually only when there's some
interesting side debate - an idiot failing to understand trivia can
still be informative, if it also causes Jukka to post a little aside
illustrating some obscure point of DTD interpretation.

As posters cease to pay attention to you, you'll no doubt interpret
this as validation of the perfection of your site, when in fact it's
anything but. My posting is merely intended as a codicil to this:
don't assume that an end to debate means that we now agree your site
is wonderful, because it surely isn't. Your site is, and is likely to
remain, ****. I'd hate you to mistakenly think otherwise.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mika
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007

"Andy Dingley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 29 Nov, 17:44, "Mika" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> > I'm in the UK.

>>
>> > It's still ****.

>>
>> That is perhaps the most unhelpful info anyone has given to date, and
>> from a
>> fellow Brit no less.

>
> Thankyou. Your mistake is to assume that I _intended_ it to be
> helpful. The insult was no less deliberate for that.
>
> You're very clearly beyond help. You've receieved a vast amount of it
> already, ignored all and ridiculed most of it. Your self-fixated ways
> have convinced you that you're already perfectly correct, even in the
> face of vast evidence to the contrary. No matter that anyone quite
> reasonably tells you is wrong with your horrible behemoth of a site,
> you refuse to listen to a word of it. You even ridicule the far more
> skilled members of this ng. who've bothered to try and help you.
>
> You're clearly either an idiot, or at least so impervious to advice,
> that it's a waste of time to comment further. There will be a gradual
> silence descending around you as more and more people drop you quietly
> into their killfiles. Why should anyone waste time arguing with a
> dullard? We do this a lot, but usually only when there's some
> interesting side debate - an idiot failing to understand trivia can
> still be informative, if it also causes Jukka to post a little aside
> illustrating some obscure point of DTD interpretation.
>
> As posters cease to pay attention to you, you'll no doubt interpret
> this as validation of the perfection of your site, when in fact it's
> anything but. My posting is merely intended as a codicil to this:
> don't assume that an end to debate means that we now agree your site
> is wonderful, because it surely isn't. Your site is, and is likely to
> remain, ****. I'd hate you to mistakenly think otherwise.


How mature.

We accept that the site may not be perceived as good when accessed from
abroad, but if you try it when you are in the UK, you will see why it has
been voted website of the day in a number of places including by the BBC.
Here many people love the experience it brings, which is why we have 100s of
repeat daily visitors.

So yes, use it in the USA, and you may perceive it as "s**t", if that is the
extent of your vocabulary.

Use it in the UK as intended, and it is a far better experience - one you
have not been able to recreate.

So what really are you commenting on? Like I said, if that is your opinion
of logic, go and complain to Google China that you can't understand the font
they use.

We will launch a USA portal, on USA servers, when we get there, but this is
for now a UK startup. Surely that is not so very hard to comprehend.

The huge mistake we made when posting here was forgetting that you are
mostly from the USA.

And as for your continued projection onto us that we have ignored and
ridiculed the comments made here, you are completely ignorant to the fact we
have changed *several* things based purely on the feedback here, and have
said so over and over, and users here have reported since doing so that the
site is "a lot faster", and we have now done as much as time and cost will
allow. You will of course continue to believe that cannot be true, because
that is the limit of your understanding. Because you know you cannot
change, you project it onto someone you have no knowledge of and have never
met, that in fact it is they who cannot change. This flies in the face of
the hours of work we have done to change the very things fed back to us
here.

Please, continue to enjoy USA websites that do not try to do something
interesting, innovative, or original. We are doing our best as a very small
operation, and being bullied and berated by narrow-minded people who have
not even had the intended experience the website gives to its target
audience, is frankly a waste of both our time.

It is I who will be drifting away from this group, I assure you, as it
serves no purpose to ask for feedback from people who are incapable of
giving it for a number of reasons, geographical and otherwise.

Mika


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mika
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-30-2007

"Norman Peelman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:474f55b1$0$24310$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Mika wrote:
>> "Norman Peelman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:474eb5ac$0$2557$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>>> Ok, where does George St. end? In Opera 9,21 (Linux) I am able to walk
>>> (run) from the intersection of George St. and Red Lion St. all the way
>>> to the 3 way intersection of George St., The Square, and The Quadrant.
>>>
>>> Norm

>>
>> That is correct. George Street works perfectly in Opera, as does
>> Portobello Road as we have said. Oxford Street however does not work
>> correctly in Opera, that is you can only scroll up to House of Fraser.
>> In any other browser you can scroll continuously more than twice as far.

>
> Can confirm that, Opera 9.21 (Linux for me) has a ceiling of 32765px for
> the width of a DIV, after which it does not display. The limit does not
> exist for the height attribute. Even tried setting it with javascript.
>
> Norm


PS: Opera have been in touch and accepted the issue. They have improved it
for the 9.5 beta and tested our site, but there is still a restriction
(around 60000px now). We are working with them to take the ceiling off it
altogether.

Mika


 
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
Team Members needed for an Open source project (Work from your location/Work Online) umeshawasthi General Computer Support 0 12-13-2010 05:05 PM
Does this page work in your Firefox? Mika Javascript 5 11-28-2007 10:55 AM
If your Tv has progresive Scan does your DVD have to have it to work ? Alyssa DVD Video 5 01-06-2006 11:10 PM
ZoneAlarm has detected a problem with your installation, and therefore has restricted Internet access from your machine for your protection. Donít panic A Teuchter Computer Support 2 05-19-2005 09:20 PM
When I open Internet Explorer, along with my home page a pop page pops up, I have changed home page but that doesnt work Phil Computer Support 7 03-04-2004 12:22 AM



Advertisments