Cannot post or reply
- Thread starter sschutze
- Start date
FireFox still doesn't work completely right. Will not show posts as read, and still on the Bash, won't let me read anything as it says content is labeled as [Games]. Done all I can on this 'puter, just have to do it at home.
Mike
Well-Known Member
I received the files Corley sent me on his two computers. I was able to find a .dll file difference in IE between the two. The computer with the most recent file will not log in. So I am wondering if maybe this file might be the culprit. About that time, Martin72 sent me his IE configuration. His computer will not log in and it has the same .dll file as the computer Corley has that will log in. :wall:
Corley was sharp-eyed and noticed W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) was indicating several code errors on the page. For any others that might have noticed this, I want to point out that W3C is really working on a very worthy project. Their mission is to work with Web coders and browser coders in an effort to standardize coding practices. Their hope is that all Web sites should be fully W3C-Compliant with their code and that all browsers also become compliant so as to properly display that code. The fly in that ointment is that code is advancing so rapidly that no one can keep up with it.
If I am coding a page and I want to display a line break (some text on one line and the balance on the next line), there are currently three ways to insert that break, using a br tag. It would look like this -
<br>
But wiser minds have prevailed and said that all open tags must have the appropriate closing tag. Since a br tag is a stand-alone, it now must be coded as -
<br />
And in order to XHTML-compliant, that tag must be coded in lower-case letters. It cannot be coded as -
<BR />
Guess what? I can code one line break as <br>, the next as <br /> and the third as <BR /> and each one of those tags is going to create a line break on your monitor. But W3C wants everyone to start using standardized code and that means only <br /> is acceptable.
If I want to display the word dog in the center of a horizontal line, there are different ways to do it.
<center>dog</center> (See, I was a good lad and provided a closing tag)
<div align="center">dog</div>
<div style="text-align:center;">dog</div>
All three of those instances will put that word at the center of the line, but W3C says only door number 3 is valid code.
When Corley first discovered the validator, he thought he was seeing 24 errors on the home page. Actually, there were 84 errors and 24 warnings. Over 50 of the errors were caused by one, single ampersand not being properly escaped by the IPB coders. W3C saw the navigation module as a list and didn't like how I had inserted lines with line breaks, so I coded each line as a list item, using li tags. A common way to display a link that will open in a new tab is to add a target="_blank" statement to the URL. Ooops, that is now deprecated, so it has to be coded as rel="external" to properly validate. The bottom line is that I worked for about an hour and got the error count down to 20 and eliminated all 24 warnings.
But to point out that none of this had any effect on how some people are having problems logging in, not one of the changes I made made the page look any different or act any different. I say "tomato" and W3C says "tomato". And as an example of how well sites operate with W3C errors, I tracked down these three sites -
Google.com - 36 errors and 2 warnings
CNN.com - 106 errors and 37 warnings
Amazon.com - 390 errors and 111 warnings :wow:
I do try to code with XHTML-compliant code, but Amazon is proving that being compliant isn't as important as you might think. When the mere act of changing a properly-closed br tag from upper-case to lower case can cure an error, I tend not to fret over it. All of my added code validates 100%, so when Invision feels the same need to have their code validate, I'll start spending more time worrying about it.
The upside to all of this is the fact that our traffic numbers are currently phenomenal. In terms of unique visitors to the site, total visits to the site and total number of pages served, we are going to blow away all of our previous records. Here are some examples. Comparing the first 6 days of this month to April 2008, we have already had more unique visitors and we have already served just a tick over 3 times as many pages. In only 6 days! If our traffic continues to hold up, we're talking about projected increases that will beat our previous records by as much as 25%. Seeing an increase in unique visitors means we're getting the word out about the site and seeing an increase in pages served means people are liking what they are finding when they get here. So the dark cloud does have a very silver lining.
Corley was sharp-eyed and noticed W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) was indicating several code errors on the page. For any others that might have noticed this, I want to point out that W3C is really working on a very worthy project. Their mission is to work with Web coders and browser coders in an effort to standardize coding practices. Their hope is that all Web sites should be fully W3C-Compliant with their code and that all browsers also become compliant so as to properly display that code. The fly in that ointment is that code is advancing so rapidly that no one can keep up with it.
If I am coding a page and I want to display a line break (some text on one line and the balance on the next line), there are currently three ways to insert that break, using a br tag. It would look like this -
<br>
But wiser minds have prevailed and said that all open tags must have the appropriate closing tag. Since a br tag is a stand-alone, it now must be coded as -
<br />
And in order to XHTML-compliant, that tag must be coded in lower-case letters. It cannot be coded as -
<BR />
Guess what? I can code one line break as <br>, the next as <br /> and the third as <BR /> and each one of those tags is going to create a line break on your monitor. But W3C wants everyone to start using standardized code and that means only <br /> is acceptable.
If I want to display the word dog in the center of a horizontal line, there are different ways to do it.
<center>dog</center> (See, I was a good lad and provided a closing tag)
<div align="center">dog</div>
<div style="text-align:center;">dog</div>
All three of those instances will put that word at the center of the line, but W3C says only door number 3 is valid code.
When Corley first discovered the validator, he thought he was seeing 24 errors on the home page. Actually, there were 84 errors and 24 warnings. Over 50 of the errors were caused by one, single ampersand not being properly escaped by the IPB coders. W3C saw the navigation module as a list and didn't like how I had inserted lines with line breaks, so I coded each line as a list item, using li tags. A common way to display a link that will open in a new tab is to add a target="_blank" statement to the URL. Ooops, that is now deprecated, so it has to be coded as rel="external" to properly validate. The bottom line is that I worked for about an hour and got the error count down to 20 and eliminated all 24 warnings.
But to point out that none of this had any effect on how some people are having problems logging in, not one of the changes I made made the page look any different or act any different. I say "tomato" and W3C says "tomato". And as an example of how well sites operate with W3C errors, I tracked down these three sites -
Google.com - 36 errors and 2 warnings
CNN.com - 106 errors and 37 warnings
Amazon.com - 390 errors and 111 warnings :wow:
I do try to code with XHTML-compliant code, but Amazon is proving that being compliant isn't as important as you might think. When the mere act of changing a properly-closed br tag from upper-case to lower case can cure an error, I tend not to fret over it. All of my added code validates 100%, so when Invision feels the same need to have their code validate, I'll start spending more time worrying about it.
The upside to all of this is the fact that our traffic numbers are currently phenomenal. In terms of unique visitors to the site, total visits to the site and total number of pages served, we are going to blow away all of our previous records. Here are some examples. Comparing the first 6 days of this month to April 2008, we have already had more unique visitors and we have already served just a tick over 3 times as many pages. In only 6 days! If our traffic continues to hold up, we're talking about projected increases that will beat our previous records by as much as 25%. Seeing an increase in unique visitors means we're getting the word out about the site and seeing an increase in pages served means people are liking what they are finding when they get here. So the dark cloud does have a very silver lining.
Gerry
Well-Known Member
2old2fast
Active Member
Not much of a computer person but here's what's happening w/me, if I go in thru chrome ,either it won't let me sign in [the register 'bar' won't pull down] or if I doget signed in , I get a partial popup on the right of the screen that says google chrome cannot find this page and I get multiple horizontal bars, inapproprietly placed here &there. I'm in thru firefox right now ,everything works as it should. don't know if this helps, but when solving a problem , I like all the info I can get . dave
Mike
Well-Known Member
Dave, log out and then try logging back in with Chrome and let's see what happens.
I've no idea what the pop-up and the horizontal bars are about, that's the first mention I've had of that happening.
I'm away for the rest of the afternoon and evening, so I won't be around to answer questions or check anything, as usual.
I've no idea what the pop-up and the horizontal bars are about, that's the first mention I've had of that happening.
I'm away for the rest of the afternoon and evening, so I won't be around to answer questions or check anything, as usual.
Mike
Well-Known Member
If some of the others who have been having problems with just one browser or with just one computer would give that another try, I would appreciate it.
As a real quick aside, I am now running a nightly-build test version of Firefox 4.2. This baby is so new, it has been released in the last few hours and still has the new car smell to it. These builds are so bleeding edge, they are not even identified as Firefox, but rather as Minefield builds. This version is Minefield 4.2 Alpha1 Pre (2011-04-08). We're talking Alpha 1, bay-bee. And it is working just fine for me. I've already visited well over 30 sites with it and it has yet to toss me a bug.
As a real quick aside, I am now running a nightly-build test version of Firefox 4.2. This baby is so new, it has been released in the last few hours and still has the new car smell to it. These builds are so bleeding edge, they are not even identified as Firefox, but rather as Minefield builds. This version is Minefield 4.2 Alpha1 Pre (2011-04-08). We're talking Alpha 1, bay-bee. And it is working just fine for me. I've already visited well over 30 sites with it and it has yet to toss me a bug.
ellis8500
Member
Yes, I believe that last week I was able to log in on IE6 at work and IE 8 at my home desk top. Now I cannot. Firefox at work is good as well as Chrome at home. On my step-daughter's laptop I can log in using the same version of IE 8 as on my desktop that will not let me log in. Very perplexing problem.
Corley
New Member
Mike,
It apears that the Firefox issue I saw was something else, as upon retrying it I found I couldn't load half of the pages I tried to load on any site. Strange thing was that Google home page worked fine, but other pages either just failed to load or flagged some loading error. I say "Was", because I did a reinstall of Firefox, and now that system works OK again. Now I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop on that sytem and some more errors to start showing up, because that problem is unexplained. Anyway, I sorry for the false alarm on Firefox...
I'm back on IE9 right now, and really hating the way it works (not forum related)!
Jay,
I said I was sorry that you didn't understand what we were doing here, but now I'm just sorry that your mother didn't teach you better manners. I don't think that sort of graphic is appropriate for the forum, and certainly not helpful. I'd hate to have to block my grandkids from reading this forum because of that sort of crudeness... If you want to give me obscene messages, please do it in a PM.
Corley
It apears that the Firefox issue I saw was something else, as upon retrying it I found I couldn't load half of the pages I tried to load on any site. Strange thing was that Google home page worked fine, but other pages either just failed to load or flagged some loading error. I say "Was", because I did a reinstall of Firefox, and now that system works OK again. Now I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop on that sytem and some more errors to start showing up, because that problem is unexplained. Anyway, I sorry for the false alarm on Firefox...
I'm back on IE9 right now, and really hating the way it works (not forum related)!
Jay,
I said I was sorry that you didn't understand what we were doing here, but now I'm just sorry that your mother didn't teach you better manners. I don't think that sort of graphic is appropriate for the forum, and certainly not helpful. I'd hate to have to block my grandkids from reading this forum because of that sort of crudeness... If you want to give me obscene messages, please do it in a PM.
Corley
Allen
Member
I'M with you--Corley--- = people just don't come back. Why put up with it !!
Gerry
Well-Known Member
Come on guys.
We all know that computer problems drive us to the ends of the earth. Its funny how we can agree to disagree on car stuff, but when it come to interweb access and taking away the things we enjoy it all gets a bit 'temperamental'
Lets just take a breath before we loose one of you.
I have been there with a certain leggy person and its not worth the bad temper it produces.
Please let it go and post some stuff on your Ts
Gerry
We all know that computer problems drive us to the ends of the earth. Its funny how we can agree to disagree on car stuff, but when it come to interweb access and taking away the things we enjoy it all gets a bit 'temperamental'
Lets just take a breath before we loose one of you.
I have been there with a certain leggy person and its not worth the bad temper it produces.
Please let it go and post some stuff on your Ts
Gerry
Allen
Member
YA but -MR -N-- got the boot for wayyyyy less not good!!!
Corley
New Member
Jay,
Gerry is right, this forum is about 'T's, and not about slamming each other. I do appologize for disparaging your favorite brand choice, even though it was meant in jest. As for your mom, give her my appologies too, what I said was uncalled for. Let's get back to the real fun stuff! Life's too short for hard feelings...
Corley
Gerry is right, this forum is about 'T's, and not about slamming each other. I do appologize for disparaging your favorite brand choice, even though it was meant in jest. As for your mom, give her my appologies too, what I said was uncalled for. Let's get back to the real fun stuff! Life's too short for hard feelings...
Corley
one finger john
Active Member
And here I am, with a ten (10) year old Mac w/Safari 5.0.4 and I can log in any time I want without getting all flustered :smashpc: . This is especially good when I want to check out what's happening here 
hthedrama: . You know, without :dhb: , I think ya'll are all house bound by the lingering weather and need to get out. I thought there was an emoticon for "pass the popcorn". Probably over at the HAMB.
hthedrama: . You know, without :dhb: , I think ya'll are all house bound by the lingering weather and need to get out. I thought there was an emoticon for "pass the popcorn". Probably over at the HAMB.
Mike
Well-Known Member
You know, Allen, you're proving you really have no clue what you're talking about. Just to make you aware, you're starting to attract a lot more of my attention than you might want. You're managing to grate on my last good nerve, so give your continued forum membership some extremely careful consideration before you wade back in here, cracking wise. If I really require someone to show their backside, trust I will ask someone to do just that. Until then, pull your shirt down.
I've been trying to deal with what I felt was a serious issue for some of these folks. I see one of your messages saying you cannot log into the forum, but you've provided precisely zero details. If you've something of value to add to this discussion, then get on with it. If you've nothing to share but disinformation, then go share it elsewhere.
For your personal edification, "Mr. N" received a warning and elected to ignore it, by his own admission. And now, you've had your warning. All that remains is to see how you choose to deal with it.
Corley, thank you for extending the apology.
Jay, that image was OTT. I've removed it. I don't mind anyone wanting to tease at someone over brand choices (I choose to drive Mopars, myself, so bring it! :winkn
, but the language that would have expressed what your image illustrated would have been unacceptable for this forum. That made the image unacceptable, as well. I tried to post that Corley was just trying to give me a hand, back in post #53, but by that time things were already starting to jump off between the pair of you. It was a case of too little, too late.Now, with that all out of the way, let's try to get back to the topic at hand.
John, I've used over 40 combinations of computers, operating systems and browsers and haven't had any problems either. But all that has done is demonstrate there is something happening with 10 or 12 systems that we still cannot understand or explain. As for the popcorn smiley, I can't let anyone else get a leg up on us. So, after you've finished with the popcorn
opcorn:, be sure to grab yourself a slice. izza: I can't have you fellows going away hungry, can I?Gerry, I purposely disabled the sliding login feature, just to narrow down the possibilities. Since it's been playing nice for months, I doubt it will make any difference. But, the fact that I had made no changes for a week prior to this problem cropping up has me looking at any possibility. If you prefer to call it clutching at straws, feel free, because that is pretty much where I am in all of this.
What I would really like is for someone who has a system/browser that would not allow a login to please try using that combination now, to see if the sliding login feature might have been causing the problem on the affected system. Lee, would you be so kind as to give it a try when you go back to work? Martin, Corley, Steve, anyone that will give it a try and let me know what did or did not happen, I would appreciate it.
Similar threads
