"Boris Zbarsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > . . . for Gecko in standards mode an <img> that returns 404 is exactly > equivalent to the alt text for layout purposes (as required by the HTML > specification). In quirks mode, if the size is specified we will make the > image that size, precisely because of pages using spacer gifs. > > But this page is in standards mode, so it gets the standards treatment.
Boris, Thanks for clueing me in on that. My gutterTest.html file now redirects to: http://www.macridesweb.com/gutterTestStandards.html which has a Transitional DOCTYPE with a URL for loose.dtd, and I've added: http://www.macrideweb.com/gutterTestQuirks.html which has a Transitional DOCTYPE without the URL. It confirms that invoking quirks mode does make Firefox behave like the other browsers for this kind of markup. This looks like it is going to be another fine point (a.k.a., "headache") when using XMLHttpRequest to swap in markup fragments. Here is what appears to be the "bottom line" in that Apple example: http://developer.apple.com/internet/webcontent/XMLHttpRequestExample/example.html on its Developer Connection: http://developer.apple.com/internet/webcontent/xmlhttpreq.html It is using text/xml with the XMLHttpRequest object's responseXML, so you might think that the browser's checks for well-formedness will avoid such problems, but in fact it is "sneaking in" old-fashioned HTML that was originally done in what is now termed quirks mode by using <![CDATA[ . . . ]]> and Firefox is being "selectively penalized" for doing "the right thing" with that. Those Apple resources are becoming very popular, and amount to inadvertent guidance on how to perform that "back door" trick with "modern objects" intended to avoid such portability problems. Sigh . . . Apple is also using .innerHTML for browsers which implement it in that context (on Windows PCs, that includes Firefox and Opera), so here's another portability issue that might be of interest to you. Your implementation of innerHTML creates well-formed markup in that context, e.g., for responseXML.documentElement.innerHTML (with xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";). Opera does not, but doesn't seem to care when you use the ill-formed markup it returned. IE's innerHTML also would be ill-formed, but can't be used in that context, e.g., responseXML.documentElement.innerHTML yields an error, perhaps because IE does care that the markup it created is ill-formed. However, IE offers an xml object, which is the homolog of the innerHTML object for that context, e.g., responseXML.documentElement.xml yields well-formed markup in IE, like Firefox's responseXML.documentElement.innerHTML. I don't know if you want to use the "de facto standard" rationale for this issue, but since you've already done it (and "properly") for innerHTML, it should now be a snap to make the equivalent available as an xml object. Regards, Fote -- _______________________________________________ dev-tech-layout mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-layout
