bg table image doesn't appear in netscape 2

[flasher]

flasher (TechnicalUser) Dec 27, 2002
Hi, I have a bg table image on this page. It appears beautifully in internet explorer and in Netscape, it doesn't show at all...except for a splattering of purple color here and there. The page looks awfull.. Is there anything I can do to remedy this??

http://www.cuva.us/pages/index.htm

Please check out the page in ie and then in netscape so you can compare what it's supposed to look like. (btw, I'm looking at it in Netscape 4.8.

Thanks a lot!

(somebody suggested making the bg image as the bg image of a cell instead of table, but that didn't work...)

 

[jeffbouldin]

I just checked your site in IE 6.0, Netscape 7, Netscape 4.79, and Opera 6.05. It looks good in all except Netscape 4.79. My wife does the web design work so I will have to have her look at it later, but my guess is you are using HTML code that is not supported in 4.79 which is about three or four years out of date. If it works in todays browsers I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[flasher]

wow. good point. thanks. youre right. I'm using 4.8 or something...

 

[jeffbouldin]

In our contracts we put a clause that staters my wife will design the web site to work in todays browsers. IE 6.0, Netscape 7, and Opera 6.05.
Here are the links:

http://www.opera.com/download/

http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/downloads/critical/ie6sp1/default.asp

 

[jeffbouldin]

That should read states not staters.

 

[flasher]

Can I see a copy of the contract by chance? I am trying for formulate my own and it would be helpful to see someone else's... thanks.

 

[jeffbouldin]

E-mail me at jeffbouldin@netscape.net

 

[ehari]

anyway u cannot balance everything.need to draw a line somehere! AOL Tech

 

[irzyxel]

your totally off browser market share then
anyone accepting such terms is plain mad !
a good site should be useable in ns4+, opera5+, ie4+

 

[jeffbouldin]

irzyxel,

That is like asking a programmer to design his games to work on Win95, he'll lose the feateures that todays computers and OSs offer and no one will buy his product. Old browsers don't support todays HTML, DHTML, XML, XTML, etc. We try to write our sites according to W3C's current standards and older browsers don't support them.

IE 6.0 is free, Opera 6.05 is free(if you don't mind thier ads), Netscape 7 is free. If people want to browse todays internet they must keep thier programs up to date.

 

[flasher]

By the way, it turns out that the browser that was looking off was not an older version of netscape but a different browser.. Seems there's navigator 7.01 and communicator 4.8 and they're 2 different browsers and the 4.8 is the up to date version of communicator.. Anyway, I changed the whole thing so it fits both now... I just never realized there were 2 types of netscapes..

 

[irzyxel]

4.8 is nowhere up to date in html and css
also last multilang communicators are 4.77-4.79, 4.8 is only available in english
netscape 7 aka mozilla is totally up to date, but has a tiny market share

yet, a good design should work in all of those ...
people dont always do as you want them to
maybe you have to save on some fancy stuff, but if you code it well, the site will be useable in all browsers and add fancy stuff if the browser supports it !
before you ask, yes, im also against complete pages in flash !
i know, im a radical and if you want to continue this, we better take it over to ethics

 

[jeffbouldin]

I feel that good designers should stop wasting so much time making sure their sites are backwards compatible...We should spend more time learning how to create forward compatible sites based on the W3C standards.

This is an exerpt from A List Apart (GREAT site...check it out)

"Old software does not support standards. Didn't we mention that already? It would be swell if we could have backward compatibility and pure standards compliance. But we can't. We have to choose. For years, most of us have chosen backward compatibility. But is this really the best choice?

For years, we've been taught to be good little web designers, building sites that work in browsers that don't. Each site we build the old-fashioned way becomes one more dung heap of bad code, one more web destination that will eventually stop working as browsers and standards evolve.

The longer we do it, the more doomed sites proliferate. Thousands of new sites premiere every day. Most of them are built to support bad browsers intead of standards. It's an epidemic. Enough already. We finally have good browsers. Let's use them.

Let's push these new browsers for all they're worth, discover the remaining holes in their standards compliance, and help browser manufacturers make them even more compliant. Flash designers do this. They push Flash as hard as it will go, butt their heads against its limits, and tell Macromedia how to make it better. As a result, Flash keeps improving. Shouldn't we be doing the same for the tools that deliver 90% of web content and functionality (i.e., web browsers)? The WaSP thinks so and ALA thinks so, too."

For more, go here...

http://www.alistapart.com/stories/tohell/helltest.html

 

[ehari]

rightly said jeffbouldin AOL Tech