Daf wrote: > "Garth Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > 9j77tn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9j77tn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >>"Daf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> >>>Hi- >>>I recently downloaded and installed Mozilla 9.02 to use as a check for >>> > my > >>>webpages- I like to check my pages in all browsers. >>>I am very new to Mozilla. >>>Would someone look at this test page and tell me if they can see why >>> >>Mozilla >> >>>is unhappy with this table? >>>http://www.ktbb.com/bgtest6.html >>>It works in all the other browsers (Opera, IE, and Netscape 4x and 6.01) >>>I can't figure out what's up with Mozilla. >>> >>Wel, it says it's XHTML Transitional 1.0, but it doesn't >>validate as such. It also uses tables nested three deep, >>and a "background" element on table cells (there is no >>such attribute in XHTML 1.0) >> >>The W3C validator results (plus the source and the parse >>tree): >> >> > <http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ktbb.com%2Fbgtest6.html&; > >>doctype=Inline&ss=&sp=> >> >>I have to wonder why it uses nested tables so much...it >>uses CSS for most of the styling, just not positioning. >> >> >> > Truth is, Garth, I'm just not very good at web design yet. I have to use > nested tables to get things where I want them. I'm just now getting to where > I'm almost comfortable with using CSS for styling but haven't delved into > the positioning part of it yet. > I realize that it doesn't validate because of the background and height > attributes and I thought I was just going to have to deal with it to get the > design I want. > But all that aside- I'm still wondering why Mozilla has the big hiccup over > that table. Does it not like nesting? > How is the CSS support with Mozilla? > Anyway- thanks for the comments- I'll start looking into positioning with > CSS > Thanks You missed it. You are telling Mozilla "Look at me, I'm XHTML 1.0!", and it's really not. That is why it's rendering your tables incorrectly. You have to either go all the way and truly make it XHTML 1.0, or don't call it XHTML 1.0, as that confuses Mozilla.
