Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'
Ken McInnes wrote: > Most browsers will render this OK, BUT Firefox 3 WILL NOT. > It just renders the page with nothing on it. :-( I had a similar issue a fwe years ago in IE6, where a script tag with nothing inside (i.e. ) would cause IE6 to show a blank screen, although I think it was in a particular environment, as it doesn't always happen. Re: Element Minimization and Empty Element Content Doesn't that mean the validators should catch it? Cheers, -Alastair *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interact/scripts.html#edef-SCRIPT "*Start tag: required, End tag: required*" http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#prohibitions "C.3. Element Minimization and Empty Element Content Given an empty instance of an element whose content model is not EMPTY (for example, an empty title or paragraph) do not use the minimized form (e.g. use and not )." or you don't like firefox loves standarts? 2008/6/24 Ken McInnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > G'day all, > > Just a quick 'heads up' on Firefox 3 rendering compared with Firefox 2 > rendering. > > If you 'self-close' a script element in the head, the validators will not > pick it up as a problem > - is is well formed xml (element is self-closed) and > - it is validly placed (correctly placed within the 'head') > > Most browsers will render this OK, BUT Firefox 3 WILL NOT. > It just renders the page with nothing on it. :-( > > All the pages that I detected this issue were xhtml 1.0 strict, without xml > declarations, served up as 'text/html'. > [ Do not have time to experiment at present - up to the eyebrows in > marking. ] > > Just thought I would pass it on, as it is worth a quick search of your > webpage coding to see if you have this issue. > > BTW, as a Uni lecturer in Internet Technologies / Web Development I have > seen lots of html coding problems / validation problems when students do > things like close 'img' or 'input' elements and validators do not pick it up > - but have not detected any problems with the script element before. > > Browsers are usually to forgiving of sloppy code and will render just > about anything, but this is an interesting change. > > regards > > Ken McInnes > Adjuct Teaching Fellow > Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies > Swinburne University of Technology > P O Box 218 > Hawthorn, Victoria3122 > Australia > > > > *** > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** > > *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'
I believe this problem has always exited in Firefox. Though, I have no idea why... /me strokes beard. Regards, Svip 2008/6/24 Matijs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > works > doesn't > > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:38 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Does anyone have an example of this behaviour? Not quite sure I follow >> the issue... >> >> Regards, >> Mike >> >> >> >> >-Original Message- >> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken McInnes >> >Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:55 AM >> >To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org >> >Subject: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems' >> > >> >G'day all, >> > >> >Just a quick 'heads up' on Firefox 3 rendering compared with >> >Firefox 2 rendering. >> > >> >If you 'self-close' a script element in the head, the >> >validators will not pick it up as a problem >> > - is is well formed xml (element is self-closed) and >> > - it is validly placed (correctly placed within the 'head') >> > >> >> >> *** >> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm >> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm >> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> *** >> > > > *** > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'
works doesn't On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:38 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anyone have an example of this behaviour? Not quite sure I follow > the issue... > > Regards, > Mike > > > > >-Original Message- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken McInnes > >Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:55 AM > >To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org > >Subject: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems' > > > >G'day all, > > > >Just a quick 'heads up' on Firefox 3 rendering compared with > >Firefox 2 rendering. > > > >If you 'self-close' a script element in the head, the > >validators will not pick it up as a problem > > - is is well formed xml (element is self-closed) and > > - it is validly placed (correctly placed within the 'head') > > > > > *** > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** > > *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems'
Does anyone have an example of this behaviour? Not quite sure I follow the issue... Regards, Mike >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken McInnes >Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:55 AM >To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org >Subject: [WSG] Firefox 3 and script tag 'problems' > >G'day all, > >Just a quick 'heads up' on Firefox 3 rendering compared with >Firefox 2 rendering. > >If you 'self-close' a script element in the head, the >validators will not pick it up as a problem > - is is well formed xml (element is self-closed) and > - it is validly placed (correctly placed within the 'head') > *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
