23 replies [Last post]
clandestine
Offline
Regular
Last seen: 8 years 51 weeks ago
Timezone: GMT-7
Joined: 2005-12-18
Posts: 28
Points: 4

So my website is validated and has no errors except for the flash embed code I got from dreamweaver. Which I am not going to worry about since its not effecting whats wrong with the site.

Here is my webpage
http://www.clandestinedesigns.com/ccinsurance/index.php

if you view it in Safari it is pretty much what I want, except below the flash animation there is black spaces which aren't supposed to be there.

If you view in FF its the same

now, if you view in IE 7 the entire top navigation in the banner goes missing
and if you view in IE6 the entire site is all messed up Sad

Could anyone help me solve theses problems?

here is the CSS style sheet

#containter
{
	border:1px;
	border-color:white;
	width:784px;
	height:100%;
}
 
#banner_container
{
	width:782px;
	height:119px;
}
 
#banner_top
{
	background:url(images/banner_782x90.gif);
	width:782px;
	height:90px;
	float:top;
}
 
#banner_btm
{
	background:url(images/banner_122x29.gif);
	width:122px;
	height:29px;
	float:left;
}
 
#banner_bg
{
	background:url(images/banner_bg_6x29.gif);
	height:29px;
	width:100%;
}
 
#nav_container
{
	height:29px;
}
 
#nav_left
{
	background:url(images/nav_left_9x29.gif);
	width:9px;
	height:29px;
	float:right;
}
 
#nav_mid
{
	background:url(images/nav_mid_14x29.gif);
	height:29px;
	float:right;
}
 
#nav_right
{
	background:url(images/nav_right_14x29.gif);
	width:14px;
	height:29px;
	float:right;
}
 
#nav_text
{
	height:29px;
	padding:2px;
}
 
#sub_nav
{
	background:url(images/sub_nav_782x26.gif);
	width:782px;
	height:26px;
}
 
#flash_banner
{
	width:782px;
	height:223px;
	background:white;
	float:left;
}
 
#content_container
{
	width:614px;
	float:left;
}
 
#content_top
{
	background:url(images/content_top_614x2);
	width:614px;
	height:2px;
}
 
#content_mid
{
	background:#190b03;
	width:614px;
}
 
#sub_content_container
{
	width:167px;
	float:left;
}
 
#sub_top
{
	background:url(images/sub_content_167x2.gif);
	width:167px;
	height:2px;
}
 
#sub_mid
{
	background:#3b2e0e;
	width:167px;
}

and the page code

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<style type="text/css"> 
@import url(style.css);
</style>
</head>
 
<body bgcolor="#000000">
 
<div id="containter">
 
	<div id="banner_container">
		<div id="banner_top"></div>
		<div id="banner_btm"></div>
		<div id="banner_bg">
			<div id="nav_right"></div>
			<div id="nav_mid">
				<div id="nav_text">
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
				</div>
			</div>
			<div id="nav_left"></div>
		</div>	
	</div>
	<div id="sub_nav"></div>
	<div id="flash_banner">
		<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,28,0" width="782" height="223">
		                    <param name="movie" value="flash_banner.swf" />
		                    <param name="quality" value="high" />
		                    <embed src="flash_banner.swf" quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="782" height="223"></embed>
		                  </object>
	</div>
	<div id="content_container">
		<div id="content_top"></div>
		<div id="content_mid">
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
		</div>
	</div>
	<div id="sub_content_container">
		<div id="sub_top"></div>
		<div id="sub_mid">
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
			<p>&nbsp;</p>
		</div>
	</div>
 
</div>	
</body>
</html>

Thanks for any help

CupidsToejam
CupidsToejam's picture
Offline
Guru
Florida
Last seen: 4 years 43 weeks ago
Florida
Timezone: GMT-4
Joined: 2008-08-15
Posts: 2637
Points: 1556

Well, for one, this site

Well, for one, this site does not validate like you say. Second, you should buy a book on CSS if you havent done so already. The way this site is constructed needs help. For example: why is your mathead one big image? And why do you have so many Divisions? You can get it done with just four. Bottom line, its messy. I would start over.

Ed Seedhouse
Ed Seedhouse's picture
Offline
Guru
Victoria British Columbia
Last seen: 28 weeks 5 days ago
Victoria British Columbia
Timezone: GMT-8
Joined: 2005-12-14
Posts: 3570
Points: 675

clandestine wrote:So my

clandestine wrote:

So my website is validated and has no errors except for the flash embed code I got from dreamweaver.

In other words it isn't validated.

Quote:

Which I am not going to worry about since its not effecting whats wrong with the site.

Well then, since you know more than we, why are you asking us for help?

Ed Seedhouse

Posting Guidelines

Watch out! I am carrying irony, sarcasm and satire, and know how to use them.

clandestine
Offline
Regular
Last seen: 8 years 51 weeks ago
Timezone: GMT-7
Joined: 2005-12-18
Posts: 28
Points: 4

Thanks guys for the help

Thanks guys for the help on solving my problems.

osgood
Offline
Enthusiast
Last seen: 11 years 36 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-09-24
Posts: 61
Points: 0

As I've said before it

As I've said before it doesn't matter if a site validates or not. It doesn't necessarily mean its going to work because it validates, quite often it doesn't. And as for Flash not validating who the f--k gives a toss.

If you can't be positive and help then don't post at all.

Hugo
Hugo's picture
Offline
Moderator
London
Last seen: 5 years 26 weeks ago
London
Joined: 2004-06-06
Posts: 15668
Points: 2806

And as I think I have said

And as I think I have said before osgood it DOES matter if a site validates but you are correct it doesn't necessarily mean that code renders the way you want, validation serves a certain purpose, to inform when malformed markup exists and for this reason it's damned important.

Before you make your first post it is vital that you READ THE POSTING GUIDELINES!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please post ALL your code - both CSS & HTML - in [code] tags
Please validate and ensure you have included a full Doctype before posting.
Why validate? Read Me

osgood
Offline
Enthusiast
Last seen: 11 years 36 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-09-24
Posts: 61
Points: 0

Malformed mark-up IS NOT

Malformed mark-up IS NOT always the cause of a page to render incorrectly.

I particularly responded to this because of the aspect of Flash not validating, who cares, as the OP said, thats not relevant.

IF and its a big IF in this case only the Flash is causing a page to not validate why be so bloody negative. And you cares IF the the masthead is one big image or not.

Two totally negative posts which helps absolutely no-one, especially the OP.

It appears that the OP has ironed out some of the problems, no thanks to the information gained in this forum. Now thats a good recommendation isnt it. Is no wonder its about as slow as a tortoise in here with replies like the ones we've seen. Not exactly gaining much popularity.

Ed Seedhouse
Ed Seedhouse's picture
Offline
Guru
Victoria British Columbia
Last seen: 28 weeks 5 days ago
Victoria British Columbia
Timezone: GMT-8
Joined: 2005-12-14
Posts: 3570
Points: 675

osgood wrote:Malformed

osgood wrote:

Malformed mark-up IS NOT always the cause of a page to render incorrectly.

That's true, and I don't believe I've ever claimed differently. Nor did I say anything of the kind in my message so far as I can see.

Quote:

I particularly responded to this because of the aspect of Flash not validating, who cares, as the OP said, thats not relevant.

This does not follow. I don't know if fixing the flash element and making it valid would fix the page,and I didn't say it would. I do know that if you don't feed a browser valid html then the browser isn't obligated to act in any particular way while, if you do, the browsers that claim to follow the standards should display in the standard way and you have a basis for complaint if they don't. And I do know that it's possible to insert a flash element while keeping the html valid.

Quote:

IF and its a big IF in this case only the Flash is causing a page to not validate why be so bloody negative. And you cares IF the the masthead is one big image or not.

What's negative about pointing out a fact? If the page doesn't validate it doesn't validate. This one doesn't. That's hardly a hanging offence and I don't see how pointing out the simple fact is offensive. When did the truth become offensive outside of the Republican party?

I also find it a little offensive when someone asking for help and therefore presumably expecting some expertise also and at the same time refuses certain advice in advance. Possibly I was a little sharper than need be, but then I am certainly no saint.

Ed Seedhouse

Posting Guidelines

Watch out! I am carrying irony, sarcasm and satire, and know how to use them.

osgood
Offline
Enthusiast
Last seen: 11 years 36 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-09-24
Posts: 61
Points: 0

You openly admitted to not

You openly admitted to not knowing anything about Flash (infact I detected an attitude of total dislike for it) so perhaps you're advice, or lack of it, was based purely on personal opinion rather than being helpful.

Sure, if you don't like Flash then thats your right to not like it, just don't comment, particularly if it concerns a page not validating because of it.

Problem is you just seem to dismiss anything and everything that you find 'offensive'.

Of course theres ways of writing Flash to the page to keep the document valid. Is it worth the extra effort, well since you know nothing about Flash and it seem little about validation, I'll let you into a secret, NO.

Ed Seedhouse
Ed Seedhouse's picture
Offline
Guru
Victoria British Columbia
Last seen: 28 weeks 5 days ago
Victoria British Columbia
Timezone: GMT-8
Joined: 2005-12-14
Posts: 3570
Points: 675

osgood wrote:Of course

osgood wrote:

Of course theres ways of writing Flash to the page to keep the document valid. Is it worth the extra effort, well since you know nothing about Flash and it seem little about validation, I'll let you into a secret, NO.

And your authority for this opinion is? I prefer the opinion of the people who are in chage of designing html as expressed here.

Ed Seedhouse

Posting Guidelines

Watch out! I am carrying irony, sarcasm and satire, and know how to use them.

osgood
Offline
Enthusiast
Last seen: 11 years 36 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-09-24
Posts: 61
Points: 0

Experience. You won't learn

Experience. You won't learn much if you just follow the sheep. What frontline experience does the W3C have? They don't design real world sites.

Triumph (not verified)
Anonymous's picture
Guru

osgood wrote:Experience. You

osgood wrote:

Experience. You won't learn much if you just follow the sheep. What frontline experience does the W3C have? They don't design real world sites.

Good grief. Seriously?

osgood
Offline
Enthusiast
Last seen: 11 years 36 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-09-24
Posts: 61
Points: 0

Sure I'm serious. What

Sure I'm serious. What experience do the W3C have of budgets, time constraints, expectations from clients, the real world?

They are just a bunch of tech geeks who have different agendas to those that work on the frontline of actually producing something to make a profit.

downtap
downtap's picture
Offline
Enthusiast
Dallas, TX
Last seen: 5 years 25 weeks ago
Dallas, TX
Timezone: GMT-7
Joined: 2008-01-18
Posts: 227
Points: 36

I don't know if this is

I don't know if this is worthy of a response, but creating valid code is not the equivalent of brain surgery. In fact, anyone who claims to be a web designer, should have little trouble creating valid code. In fact, you'd WANT to create valid code as that will help you determine issues when problem solving cross browser compatibility for instance. Just like if you develop for Drupal, there is a certain level of php coding standards. The same goes for the general web. One quick google of embed flash valid, returns many valid ways of inserting flash into an html document. And guess what...they are all EASY!

I've personally been designing a page, can't figure out why it's not rendering properly, then after running it through the validator realize i missed a character, or misdeclared something. Anyone who can't create valid code, or don't think valid code is important, is not a true designer. Ultimately, in the end, us web designers are merely programmers of a rather simple language at its root with a clearly laid out set of rules. The same goes for programmers of C#, Perl, etc..

Triumph (not verified)
Anonymous's picture
Guru

downtap wrote:I don't know

downtap wrote:

I don't know if this is worthy of a response, but creating valid code is not the equivalent of brain surgery. In fact, anyone who claims to be a web designer, should have little trouble creating valid code. ...

Your response is correct. Fixing invalid code isn't exactly a hard job. Why someone wouldn't fix broken code is a mystery.

Triumph (not verified)
Anonymous's picture
Guru

osgood wrote:Sure I'm

osgood wrote:

Sure I'm serious. What experience do the W3C have of budgets, time constraints, expectations from clients, the real world?

They are just a bunch of tech geeks who have different agendas to those that work on the frontline of actually producing something to make a profit.

Please, give us all a break. Ad hominem attacks against people you've never met is a logical fallacy.

Web standards can help a company meet budgets, limit time on a project, meet expectations all in the real world. Sometimes immediately and sometimes in the long run.

Tyssen
Tyssen's picture
Offline
Moderator
Brisbane
Last seen: 5 years 38 weeks ago
Brisbane
Timezone: GMT+10
Joined: 2004-05-01
Posts: 8201
Points: 1386

osgood wrote:What experience

osgood wrote:

What experience do the W3C have of budgets, time constraints, expectations from clients, the real world?

Have you seen the W3C member list? Are you seriously going to try and tell us that none of the companies on that list have any experience with budgets, deadlines or clients?

Of if you want to look at individuals, take a look at the CSS Working Group and the HTML Working Group - plenty of people on both those lists who have experience of 'budgets, time constraints, expectations from clients, the real world' and not all of them are just reps of the browser makers.

How to get help
Post a link. If you can't post a link, jsFiddle it.
My blog | My older articles | CSS Reference

scope1000
Offline
Regular
Last seen: 11 years 32 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-10-30
Posts: 33
Points: 0

Who is on the W3C members

Who is on the W3C members list is NOT applicable.

Anyway the first one I pick out from the list randomly and do a validation test, what do you know, it fails:

http://www.agiledelta.com/

So I guess the W3C is very happy at having their logo associated with a site that doesn't validate. Its weird isn't it, don't ya think?

I tried others at random too that don't validate, so its not a great advert that you provide is it. Sorry to be so negative but you should check stuff before you post.

What the heck does that tell you? You guys are ALL hot air (well actually you personally do provide some good answers on this and other forums)and when someone like me, who has unbiased opinions comes along and give another side of the story and reveals the lies (not all lies of course) you get all *beep*ty, well the moderator does anyway because hes blocked me from posting anymore comments under my other name, osgood.

Again what does that tell you about the people who run this forum. They are blinkered, only want people to agree with them and are short sighted. What will anyone learn in an environment like that.

Ok I admit that sometimes I can get a little out of hand but a lot of my points are logical, so why I should be stopped from free speech is beyond me to be honest.

scope1000
Offline
Regular
Last seen: 11 years 32 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-10-30
Posts: 33
Points: 0

Of course valid code isn't

Of course valid code isn't hard to write. But do you really need to go the extra mile if a Flash file is causing the page to be invalid, not really, as it does no harm. IF you want to validate it then by all means go ahead and collect some merit marks and waste a little more production time.

The bottom line is total validation is strictly not necessary.

Plus, certain unhelpful people in this forum keep saying 'validate your page' to people who clearly have no idea how to write html or css, so what use is that to them? It would be more positive to advise them to take some lessons in html and css surely. Only then will the validator mean anything. Without prior knowledge of html/css its practically useless advice.

scope1000
Offline
Regular
Last seen: 11 years 32 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-10-30
Posts: 33
Points: 0

Well theres no need to block

Well theres no need to block me from posting just because I have a differing opinion surely?

You should be blocking those that respond negatively and unhelpfully, like Seedhouse.

Stomme poes
Stomme poes's picture
Offline
Elder
Netherlands
Last seen: 8 years 36 weeks ago
Netherlands
Timezone: GMT+2
Joined: 2008-02-04
Posts: 1854
Points: 378

Quote:This does not follow.

Quote:

This does not follow. I don't know if fixing the flash element and making it valid would fix the page,and I didn't say it would. I do know that if you don't feed a browser valid html then the browser isn't obligated to act in any particular way while, if you do, the browsers that claim to follow the standards should display in the standard way and you have a basis for complaint if they don't. And I do know that it's possible to insert a flash element while keeping the html valid.

I didn't look at the code but assumed right away that the OP was using the tag. Is it valid? No. BUt it still has better browser support than object (I still to this day cannot get more than 3 browsers to show the second child (alternative content) to objects like the specs say they MUST) and while I've seen some nasty code in there, I've not seen the tag actually causing rendering problems.

Looked ok in IE7, I assume it was a Javascript problem? I'm so highly allergic to Javascript for stuff like this... grrrr... *deep breath* but that's the dream beaver doing its thing, I know.

IE6 is the only one who looks whacked and I'd say it's the floats riding up to alongside the lower part of the banner. Remove about half of those divs and it may be easier to reign IE6 in. No reason not to have one whole banner floated left (or better yet, a bg image on the header and an image-replacement name on the left) and the nav as a single unit floated right with a top margin pushing it down. With all these extra divs it's hard for me to see what IE6 is seeing. Make the right link1,2,3 nav a single unit floated right (forget the images for now) and with IE6, go from there.

Re validation I thought the whole point was to prevent us here from having to validate everyone's pages to find out if an actual code error was the problem, one that the OP could've had the validator tell them what the problem is and had them fix it by themselves. If the only thing not validating has nothing to do the the problem (no alt tags on images, using proprietary tags, destroying lovely html with stupid retarded overrated bloated floated sugar-coated jabba-da-javascript where it Should Not Be) then I think the OP has fulfilled the basic ideas behind the Validate Your Page Before Posting thread. I'll still tell people it sucks, but that's extra.

I'm no expert, but I fake one on teh Internets

Hugo
Hugo's picture
Offline
Moderator
London
Last seen: 5 years 26 weeks ago
London
Joined: 2004-06-06
Posts: 15668
Points: 2806

Osgood please consider this

Osgood please consider this a further warning, having been blocked and registered as a new user please tread carefully, do not continue with this argumentative nature; this thread is done with unless the OP has anything further to add, no more discussions of this nature, help people by all means but respect forum members and avoid the reasons that had you blocked previously.

Before you make your first post it is vital that you READ THE POSTING GUIDELINES!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please post ALL your code - both CSS & HTML - in [code] tags
Please validate and ensure you have included a full Doctype before posting.
Why validate? Read Me

scope1000
Offline
Regular
Last seen: 11 years 32 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-10-30
Posts: 33
Points: 0

So its ok for others to

So its ok for others to debate (I wouldn't necessarily call it argue) but because I have differing opinions, which don't seem to fit in, thats a good reason to stop people posting.

I'm all for helping people as can be seen in recent posts by providing positive solutions for their problems.

I was blocked for creating another thread to answer a post by Trumpet who blocked me from answering in the correct thread. The issue was down to your own making, not mine. Anyway Tony has already contacted me and I have responded. I chance continue, where I see fit, to provide the WHOLE picture, not just a bit of it.

Hugo
Hugo's picture
Offline
Moderator
London
Last seen: 5 years 26 weeks ago
London
Joined: 2004-06-06
Posts: 15668
Points: 2806

This thread is now closed!

This thread is now closed!

Before you make your first post it is vital that you READ THE POSTING GUIDELINES!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please post ALL your code - both CSS & HTML - in [code] tags
Please validate and ensure you have included a full Doctype before posting.
Why validate? Read Me