On 11/29/2011 10:04 AM, WLS wrote:
On 11/29/2011 09:51 AM, hawker wrote:
On 11/29/2011 9:23 AM, WLS wrote:
On 11/29/2011 09:13 AM, hawker wrote:
Reading along there appears to be a change in the SM 2.5 rendering
engine that makes a small number of sites unreadable. I trying to grasp
how big this issue is (IE how likely am I to run across this), and is
there some known small issue causing this with a 2.5.1 patch coming up?
I have already found a decent number of sites that work fine in FireFox
3.x or IE8 but not Seamonkey 2.x and I deal with it by occasionally
using, gasp, IE but this sounds like it might be bigger than that so I'm
wondering if I should hold off a few weeks again?
Hawker
Links to those site could be helpful. I've never had a problem with
SeaMonkey 2.x versions.
I'd be happy to test them in SeaMonkey 2.6b1.
As to the Seamonkey 2.5 issues, I got this from reading here and folks
listing a few sites here and there, especially it seems, some routers.
So I have not tested these in recent FF versions. But a while ago these
two sites worked fine in FF and IE8 but not IE7 or Seamonkey.
http://www.taurusbass.com/
Note the two buttons on top of each other (in/register and visitors)
It looks fine in FF and IE
I just checked the other I knew of that did not work in an earlier
version of 2.x and it seems to work fine now so I don't know if it is SM
or they updated the website. At the time it didn't work in IE 7.x either.
Do you have Preferences> Advanced> HTTP Networking> Advertise Firefox
compatability checked?
The site looks fine in my SeaMonkey with that preference checked.
hmm. I wonder what it is then.
I have SM on three computers all three look wrong to me.
Yes I have Advertise SM enabled.
I highly tweak fonts and screen sizes on my machines. It could be
related to that. I have noticed that whatever Windows does to 1920 x
1200 screen sizes to make them work often breaks things that smaller
screen resolutions do not. Or are both of you using non Windows clients
and this is simply a Windows issue?
Most of the issues I have are with HTML coded e-mails that look fine in
the web client in IE but not Seamonkey.
As for the "The web site was not properly written" argument. I find this
a poor argument. They may be poorly written, but that is a fact of life
of the web and the browsers job is to do the best it can do deal with
that. If another browser can properly render a poorly written website,
but SM cannot then I see this as a SM problem, not the website.
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
