Thread: Problem with new Format

Alright, I'm probably going to sound like a jerk, but I can't help ranting when I feel somebody keeps wasting my time.

Here's my vanilla installation of Windows 7 Professional, right out the box.








Works perfectly, huh?

And here is how it looks after checking off the 'Compatibility Mode'.





So my question is why would you use compatibility mode? The tooltip from Microsoft says that it would improve websites designed for old browsers.




Honestly, I don't care if you chose to view a modern website with a 10 year old technology. Regressing a modern browser to behave as something ancient is your choice and I don't have the time, or the desire to deal with such nonsense unless you are willing to compensate me appropriately (the balpark is dozens of custom razors).

And, yes I can very easily disable the 'Thanks', put a limit on how many letters can be used for 'location', or disable it altogether, or use different layout where the avatar is positioned in it's separate band above the post body, which would make you scroll 40% more...

Originally Posted by Troggie

I just did some testing here at work ( slow day so far) and found that I get the same error if I have Compatibility Mode set under the Tools menu in IE. Once I turn it off everything looks good so you may want to check that out Gibbs. Also Firefox and Safari as well as Opera are all browsers you can get for Windows. I have to use all 4 as my job requires it for troubleshooting web based apps.

HNSB if you still want it I can send you a copy of the Source I am looking at but seems to be specific to IE and Compatibility Mode only.

Tried your suggestion, Toggie. Works. I unchecked the box that says use compatibility view on all web sites. Refreshed the page and the type is back in the proper spaces. There is a name for those boxes, I believe called "Frames". W3C is different depending on whether you use "strict" or "transitional" for the passing of their test.
Here is the W3C link for validator page: http://validator.w3.org/ put the address of this page in the required box and click validate and you get 2 errors for XHTML Tansitional Maybe that source info will be useful.

However, the real problem might be found in your CSS (Cascadeing Style Sheets) coding. This link: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ will let you run the CSS validation of a page, and on this particular page it has 387 errors for CSS.

Just an addition. Important enough I thought to add a new reply. At work now, and on IE8 there is an icon represting broken page (upper part of your IE8 browser, next to the address bar, in fact RIGHT next to it, click it. One way it works, other way it's a bit garbled.
NOTE: the page will refresh automatically if you click on that broken page icon.

Thanks to whoever figured out compatibility mode. This problem makes sense now. I don't think Im going to spend time on it in the near future as it's isolated to one setting on one browser. There are other more important things to spend time on right now.

The problem is not with the CSS. Most of those CSS errors are irrelevant - though there are two or three minor things that should be fixed.

Oh, and SRP doesn't use frames.