On 8/31/2009 7:35 AM, Phillip Jones wrote:
> David E. Ross wrote:
>> On 8/30/2009 8:27 PM, Phillip Jones wrote:
>>> Hello, it been a while I vowed never to come back to this forum except 
>>> to ask a question. I remain true to my vow. I am asking a question
>>> I have a puzzle.
>>> examine this page with SM 1.1.17:
>>> http://villageelectronicsservice.com/VacationSchedule.aspx
>>> Now use: SM 2, FF3.0/3.5, Omniweb, Opera or iCab.
>>> In all of those All-in-ones and Web Browsers The page for me views as it 
>>> should.
>>> In SM 1.1.17
>>> after the side text is shown then the main text shows about an inch to 
>>> inch and a half wide.
>>> using the w3c validator, typing the  link above shows numerous items 
>>> needing correction and several warning. yet the other applications 
>>> appear to load correctly. If you go to any links other than vacation, 
>>> the pages work even on SM1.1.17.
>>> Anyone have an explanation.
>> Generally, a rendering engine (the browser's guts that display a Web
>> page) is programmed to "guess" how to display a page that is buggy.
>> Different rendering engines might guess differently, depending on how
>> the programmer decides HTML syntax errors should be handled.
>> SeaMonkey 1.1.17 gives different results from SeaMonkey 2.x because they
>> different Gecko engines.  SeaMonkey 2.x uses approximately the same
>> engine that is used by Firefox 3.x, an engine that guesses differently
>> from the one used by SeaMonkey 1.1.17.
>> In my opinion, a browser is not at fault if it displays a buggy Web page
>> incorrectly, even if other browsers are able to display the page
>> appropriately.  After all, if you input manure, you should not be
>> surprised if the output is also manure.
> I agree, I knew it wasn't right by running, it through the Validator and 
> coming up with all those errors and warnings.
> But I find it curious, that the efforts to be standards compliant was to 
> make it so that if a site was using bad code it wasn't suppose to load. 
>   Forcing developer of website to get it right.  Yet all the new 
> Browsers whether Gecko or webkit appear to be falling back to an old IE 
> 5 trick of self healing.
> It appears only SeaMonkey 1.1.17 is the only one loading it correctly.

While I've read suggestions that browsers reject bad HTML, I don't think
that has been implemented anywhere.  It would suddenly make much of the
Web inaccessible.  It would also cause havoc with much HTML-formatted
E-mail (an average of 9.1 HTML errors per kilobyte of message).

David E. Ross

Go to Mozdev at <http://www.mozdev.org/> for quick access to
extensions for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and other
Mozilla-related applications.  You can access Mozdev much
more quickly than you can Mozilla Add-Ons.
support-seamonkey mailing list

Reply via email to