Using !DOCTYPE HTML breaks Canvas in IE8
--
Hakan Kirkan
IT Manager
Dominor LLC / Miami
http://dominor.com
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg webdesig...@rarpsl.com
wrote:
At 16:57 -0400 on 08/01/2012, Tedd Sperling wrote about Re: [css-d] on
html
2012-08-02 12:31, Hakan Kirkan wrote:
Using !DOCTYPE HTML breaks Canvas in IE8
If it does, that would not be a CSS issue, would it?
Jukka
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
2012-08-02 4:11, Philippe Wittenbergh wrote:
Le 2 août 2012 à 06:03, Josh Rehman a écrit :
And, actually the uppercase DOCTYPE is important as
I've run into problems with the lowercase version in some browsers.
That sounds weird. Can you clarify which browsers are affected ?
By XML rules,
Am 28.07.2012 13:58 schrieb Georg:
On 28.07.2012 13:29, Markus Ernst wrote:
http://www.rapid.ch/de/rapid-einachsgeraete/prospekte.html
The headings here match the width of 3 image elements plus borders and
the 2 margins between them. With space characters added to the
margins, the width cannot
On 02/08/2012 10:31, Hakan Kirkan wrote:
Using !DOCTYPE HTML breaks Canvas in IE8
IE8 doesn't support canvas.
Rob
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ
On 02/08/2012 04:39, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
First is that while browsers may not actually use the referenced DTD
(the http... clause), they do parse the HTML based on the DOCTYPE html
PUBLIC... clause and treat the HTML differently based on what you declare.
No, they don't. It is used
Rob Crowther wrote:
Browsers have never used DOCTYPES, therefore the validation of
whether or not a document conforms (or not) to a DOCTYPE has no
impact on whether or not a browser will correctly parse, interpret
or display it.
I think that is an over-simplification, and one that is
On 8/1/12 8:39 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
At 16:57 -0400 on 08/01/2012, Tedd Sperling wrote about Re: [css-d] on
html and css versions:
What is wrong with using?
!DOCTYPE html
Sure it doesn't have a *real* DTD, but the W3C validator does somehow
validate pages that have this DOCTYPE
On 02/08/2012 17:02, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
I think that is an over-simplification, and one that is misleading
if it gets into the wrong hands.
Not really, otherwise tricks like having a DOCTYPE without a DTD
wouldn't work.
The problem is that different browsers (or
even different versions
Rob Crowther wrote: On 02/08/2012 17:02, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
I think that is an over-simplification, and one that is misleading
if it gets into the wrong hands.
Not really, otherwise tricks like having a DOCTYPE without a DTD
wouldn't work.
I respectfully disagree. My assertion was
Am 04.05.2012 01:23 schrieb Philippe Wittenbergh:
Le May 4, 2012 à 12:26 AM, Markus Ernst a écrit :
I used web fonts from Fonts.com for the first time, in a website that is both
in German and Russian. As Fonts.com serves not only bold and italic variants,
but also the latin-1 and cyrillic
On 02/08/12 18:49, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
that if a page validates against the DTD given in
the DOCTYPE directive, then it is more likely to
be parsed and rendered correctly than if it does not.
OK, then define parsed and rendered correctly. Or, put another way:
where is the parsing process
On Jul 31, 2012, at 10:17 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
A clumsy workaround…
table {
border-collapse: separate;
border-spacing: 0;
}
th, td {
border: 1px dotted black;
border-top-width: 0;
border-left-width: 0;
}
tr:first-child th, tr:first-child td
Rob Crowther wrote:
OK, then define parsed and rendered correctly.
Exactly as you meant it in your earlier message :
whether or not a browser will correctly parse, interpret or display
it.
Or, put another way: where is the parsing process for a text file
conforming to HTML4's DTD
On 02/08/12 19:40, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
Exactly as you meant it in your earlier message :
I meant it as defined in the HTML5 specification. You're apparently
disallowing that, so I wanted to know what your definition was.
The specification for the parsing process for HTML 4.01 is directly
Rob Crowther wrote:
On 02/08/12 19:40, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
Exactly as you meant it in your earlier message :
I meant it as defined in the HTML5 specification. You're apparently
disallowing that, so I wanted to know what your definition was.
How things are defined the HTML 5 Draft
On 02/08/12 20:50, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
How things are defined the HTML 5 Draft specification
is relevant only to HTML 5; since we are discussing
documents that specify a DTD in their DOCTYPE directive,
that clearly rules out documents coded to the HTML 5
Draft specification.
No, it defines
I have found a problem that occurs only in Fire Fox.
This link will display a menu that remains visible as the visitor scrolls
down the page.
http://www.austinwebmaster.com/beecreekumc/christiancrisiscare.php
It works perfectly in Internet Explorer 9, Chrome and Safari. The menu does
not
18 matches
Mail list logo
