pran Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 I have discovered that the "text color" operator no longer functions as expected. This is possibly another IE9 "surprise":When I select some text and apply for instance the "Bold" or "Italic" operator then that text is changed as expected, but when I try to apply the "text color" operator then the pair of tags ("Color" and "uncolor") are inserted together at the very beginning of the new post instead of around the selected text. Another item for someone to look into? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerardo Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Perhaps. Can't try on IE9 now, not on Windows. How does it work on Compatibility View? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pran Posted April 16, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Perhaps. Can't try on IE9 now, not on Windows. How does it work on Compatibility View?I don't know, but I had no such problem when running IE8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TylerE Posted April 17, 2011 Report Share Posted April 17, 2011 Have you considered upgrading to a proper web browser? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pran Posted April 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 Have you considered upgrading to a proper web browser?That question deserves no answer. But for various reasons I tried alternative web browsers a couple of years ago (I believe it was), and ran into so many problems with quite ordinary web pages that I shall join those who request any serious web page to work with IE - any relevant version. I have no idea why BBO Forums acts the way it does with IE version 9 (and I don't care) but I have experienced so many examples of script errors (violations of html specifications) in some way that suddenly became important with a certain version of (for instance) IE that I suspect this is another. Edit:I ran a html check on this post (before I edited it) and received 21 errors and 10 warnings on the html page!The html validation service can be found at this address: http://validator.w3.org/ in case anybody wants to try it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 ...and how many of them have to be wrong that way so that it works in Internet Exploder? It's a chicken and egg problem - everybody uses IE, so web pages have to work in IE. That breaks them for real, W3C-conforming browsers, because so does IE. So it looks like "it only works in IE, so I'll use IE, so now anything people write for me has to work in IE", so... This is getting better (mostly because between Firefox, Chrome, and Safari for iThings (Safari for Windows/Mac is effectively irrelevant, but Apple is trying) has got enough of a market share that MS has actually had to care about IE for the first time since they killed Netscape), in IE8 and IE9. But it used to be that for a browser to be useful in the wild, it had to be bug-for-bug compatible with IE6... The real answer, if it really is broken, is to fix it. If it's just broken in IE because MS is playing 3X-games again (sort of like 4X games but in real life and with no eXplore section), or it's currently broken from a legacy attempt to 3X the web space, then "get a real browser" is, in fact, the right answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pran Posted April 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 ...and how many of them have to be wrong that way so that it works in Internet Exploder? It's a chicken and egg problem - everybody uses IE, so web pages have to work in IE. That breaks them for real, W3C-conforming browsers, because so does IE. So it looks like "it only works in IE, so I'll use IE, so now anything people write for me has to work in IE", so... This is getting better (mostly because between Firefox, Chrome, and Safari for iThings (Safari for Windows/Mac is effectively irrelevant, but Apple is trying) has got enough of a market share that MS has actually had to care about IE for the first time since they killed Netscape), in IE8 and IE9. But it used to be that for a browser to be useful in the wild, it had to be bug-for-bug compatible with IE6... The real answer, if it really is broken, is to fix it. If it's just broken in IE because MS is playing 3X-games again (sort of like 4X games but in real life and with no eXplore section), or it's currently broken from a legacy attempt to 3X the web space, then "get a real browser" is, in fact, the right answer.To me this looks like a pathetic attempt to confuse the issue. HTML is a language definition independent of for instance Internet Explorer, and it should not be too difficult for the authors of a script written to this specification to show whether a problem with a particular web browser is caused by the script not conforming to the HTML specification or by the browser failing to process the script according to the HTML specification. If a script contains errors then fix it. If a browser does not process an error-free script according to HTML specifications then report the error to the owner of that browser. (And if possible try to circumvent the problem by rewriting the script.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.