Improperly nested HTML or IE7 bug?
Stan Brown
http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/math200b.htm#SigmaExamples
I have some nested <code>, <small>, and <sup> tags. Firefox does
exactly what I expected.
But Internet Explorer 7 renders them(*) as shown in this picture:
http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/webpage1.jpg
I don't *think* I've screwed up the nesting, and the page does
validate, but IE7 seems never to terminate the <code> and <sup> tags.
1. Have I done anything wrong, or is this an IE7 bug?
2. If it's a bug, is there any way around it?
3. If it's a bug in IE7, is it fixed in IE8?
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Why We Won't Help You:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/2003/05/05/why_we_wont_help_you
Ed Mullen
> On the line just above this URL:
> http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/math200b.htm#SigmaExamples
> I have some nested<code>,<small>, and<sup> tags. Firefox does
> exactly what I expected.
>
> But Internet Explorer 7 renders them(*) as shown in this picture:
> http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/webpage1.jpg
> I don't *think* I've screwed up the nesting, and the page does
> validate, but IE7 seems never to terminate the<code> and<sup> tags.
>
> 1. Have I done anything wrong, or is this an IE7 bug?
>
> 2. If it's a bug, is there any way around it?
>
> 3. If it's a bug in IE7, is it fixed in IE8?
>
Not sure if this is causing the problem but you're missing a greater
than sign below:
[<small><code>ALPHA</code> <code>x<sup>-1</sup</code>
|
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
"I would travel all my life if loneliness was not the price." - Gordon
Lightfoot
John Dunlop
> On the line just above this URL:
> http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/math200b.htm#SigmaExamples
> I have some nested <code>, <small>, and <sup> tags. Firefox does
> exactly what I expected.
>
> But Internet Explorer 7 renders them(*) as shown in this picture:
> http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/webpage1.jpg
> I don't *think* I've screwed up the nesting, and the page does
> validate, but IE7 seems never to terminate the <code> and <sup> tags.
As Ed said, you have "</sup</code>". HTML allows unclosed end-tags as a
kind of minimisation, so a validator won't report it as an error. Your
Firefox probably highlights "</sup" in the source code.
--
John
Stan Brown
>
> Stan Brown wrote:
> > On the line just above this URL:
> > http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/math200b.htm#SigmaExamples
> > I have some nested<code>,<small>, and<sup> tags. Firefox does
> > exactly what I expected.
> >
> > But Internet Explorer 7 renders them(*) as shown in this picture:
> > http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/webpage1.jpg
> > I don't *think* I've screwed up the nesting, and the page does
> > validate, but IE7 seems never to terminate the<code> and<sup> tags.
> >
> > 1. Have I done anything wrong, or is this an IE7 bug?
> >
> > 2. If it's a bug, is there any way around it?
> >
> > 3. If it's a bug in IE7, is it fixed in IE8?
> >
>
> Not sure if this is causing the problem but you're missing a greater
> than sign below:
>
> [<small><code>ALPHA</code> <code>x<sup>-1</sup</code>
Wow, Ed! Thanks -- that was fast! I have fixed it and replaced the
page, but I won't be able to look at it again till tomorrow because I
have IE6 not IE7 on my home computer.
I did "View Selection Source" in Firefox 3.5.6 before posting, and it
shows the greater-than after </sup ! I sure wish that "View Source"
in Firefox actually showed the source! ("View Source" in the Web
Developer Toolbar does actually show the source, but I haven't yet
formed the habit of using it because the interface is kind of
clunky.)
Stan Brown
> As Ed said, you have "</sup</code>". HTML allows unclosed end-tags as a
> kind of minimisation, so a validator won't report it as an error. Your
> Firefox probably highlights "</sup" in the source code.
Thanks, John, for the explanation. I have fixed that error and
replaced the page.
Unfortunately, Firefox doesn't highlight "</sup" in the source code;
instead it shows it as "</sup>"! (I had checked it before posting.)
Web Developer Toolbar does show the actual source, so I'll just have
to get into the habit of using it more.
Ed Mullen
It looks fine in SeaMonkey 2.0.1, FF 3.5.6, Opera 10.01, Safari 4.0.3
and IE8, Stan.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
Why do they report power outages on TV?
Ed Mullen
> Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:05:44 +0000 from John Dunlop<jo...@dunlop.name>:
>
>> As Ed said, you have "</sup</code>". HTML allows unclosed end-tags as a
>> kind of minimisation, so a validator won't report it as an error. Your
>> Firefox probably highlights "</sup" in the source code.
>
> Thanks, John, for the explanation. I have fixed that error and
> replaced the page.
>
> Unfortunately, Firefox doesn't highlight "</sup" in the source code;
> instead it shows it as "</sup>"! (I had checked it before posting.)
Hmm. Interesting. Both SeaMonkey and Firefox here do highlight the error.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
Disco is to music what Etch-A-Sketch is to art.
Stan Brown
>
> Stan Brown wrote:
> > Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:05:44 +0000 from John Dunlop<jo...@dunlop.name>:
> >
> >> As Ed said, you have "</sup</code>". HTML allows unclosed end-tags as a
> >> kind of minimisation, so a validator won't report it as an error. Your
> >> Firefox probably highlights "</sup" in the source code.
> >
> > Thanks, John, for the explanation. I have fixed that error and
> > replaced the page.
> >
> > Unfortunately, Firefox doesn't highlight "</sup" in the source code;
> > instead it shows it as "</sup>"! (I had checked it before posting.)
>
> Hmm. Interesting. Both SeaMonkey and Firefox here do highlight the error.
Very strange! I wonder: is there some setting in Firefox that I've
missed to make "View Source" actually show the source rather than
Firefox's massaged version of the source? I'm certain that View
Source showed the greater-than sign, because I had checked it before
posting and then again after reading your note but before uploading
the corrected file.
Jukka K. Korpela
>>> Unfortunately, Firefox doesn't highlight "</sup" in the source code;
>>> instead it shows it as "</sup>"! (I had checked it before posting.)
>>
>> Hmm. Interesting. Both SeaMonkey and Firefox here do highlight the
>> error.
>
> Very strange! I wonder: is there some setting in Firefox that I've
> missed to make "View Source" actually show the source rather than
> Firefox's massaged version of the source?
I have Firefox 3.5.6, and in View Source, it displays "</sup" in red (when
there is no ">" after it), and I haven't done anything special to the
browser. So it does not modify the source but displays it with some
highlighting. It also displays the "/" in "<br />" in red, even when an
XHTML doctype is declared.
Using the Web Developer Extension, its View Source shows the same as the
browser's function, but View Generated Source shows effectively the parsed
DOM tree as linearized. It throws away the doctype declaration, inserts
implied end tags like "</body>", and it even shows the input
<p><b>foo</p>
as
<p><b>foo</b></p>
So it's odd, but it's also useful in checking out how the browser actually
parses the document.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Stan Brown
<jkor...@cs.tut.fi>:
> Stan Brown wrote:
> > Very strange! I wonder: is there some setting in Firefox that I've
> > missed to make "View Source" actually show the source rather than
> > Firefox's massaged version of the source?
>
> I have Firefox 3.5.6, and in View Source, it displays "</sup" in red (when
> there is no ">" after it), and I haven't done anything special to the
> browser. So it does not modify the source
Why, I wonder, does your Firefox 3.5.6 behave differently from mine?
I can't understand why "View Source" means "View Source" for you but
"View something vaguely resembling source" for me.
> but displays it with some
> highlighting. It also displays the "/" in "<br />" in red, even when an
> XHTML doctype is declared.
Where do you see a "<br />" in my page? I'm pretty sure I never
used that.
Stan Brown
>
> Stan Brown wrote:
> > Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:46:40 -0500 from Ed Mullen<e...@edmullen.net>:
> >>
> >> Stan Brown wrote:
> >>> On the line just above this URL:
> >>> http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/math200b.htm#SigmaExamples
> >
> > shows the greater-than after</sup ! I sure wish that "View Source"
> > in Firefox actually showed the source! ("View Source" in the Web
> > Developer Toolbar does actually show the source, but I haven't yet
> > formed the habit of using it because the interface is kind of
> > clunky.)
>
> It looks fine in SeaMonkey 2.0.1, FF 3.5.6, Opera 10.01, Safari 4.0.3
> and IE8, Stan.
Thanks, Ed. And I verified that it now looks fine in IE7 as well,
after you found the missing > sign.
Ed Mullen
> Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:04:02 -0500 from Ed Mullen<e...@edmullen.net>:
>>
>> Stan Brown wrote:
>>> Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:46:40 -0500 from Ed Mullen<e...@edmullen.net>:
>>>>
>>>> Stan Brown wrote:
>>>>> On the line just above this URL:
>>>>> http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/math200b.htm#SigmaExamples
>>>
>>> I did "View Selection Source" in Firefox 3.5.6 before posting, and it
>>> shows the greater-than after</sup ! I sure wish that "View Source"
>>> in Firefox actually showed the source! ("View Source" in the Web
>>> Developer Toolbar does actually show the source, but I haven't yet
>>> formed the habit of using it because the interface is kind of
>>> clunky.)
>>
>> It looks fine in SeaMonkey 2.0.1, FF 3.5.6, Opera 10.01, Safari 4.0.3
>> and IE8, Stan.
>
> Thanks, Ed. And I verified that it now looks fine in IE7 as well,
> after you found the missing> sign.
>
You're certainly welcome. BTW, how's the weather up in the Ithaca area?
I haven't talked with my sister since the big storm swept up the
eastern seaboard.
Sunny and about 52 here in Alpharetta, GA today. :-) My arm hurts from
patting myself on the back for moving down here in 1998. Haven't had to
shovel any of my weather since that last winter in NJ.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.
Jukka K. Korpela
> Where do you see a "<br />" in my page?
I don't. I was referring to what I saw in my test with some HTML constructs.
I was curious to see how Firefox View Source handles the XHTML construct,
and I was somewhat surprised at seeing that it flags (implicitly - by using
red color) it as erroneous even when XHTML doctype is used.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
GTalbot
> Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:46:40 -0500 from Ed Mullen <e...@edmullen.net>:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Stan Brown wrote:
> > > On the line just above this URL:
> > >http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/math200b.htm#SigmaExamples
> > > I have some nested<code>,<small>, and<sup> tags. Firefox does
> > > exactly what I expected.
>
> > > But Internet Explorer 7 renders them(*) as shown in this picture:
> > >http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/webpage1.jpg
(...)
> > [<small><code>ALPHA</code> <code>x<sup>-1</sup</code>
Stan,
a missing ">" will be reported markup checkers like HTML Tidy [1] in
this manner:
Line 642: Warning: missing </code> before </p>
Also Validome (a more powerful validator [2]) will report this as
worth-warning:
http://www.validome.org/validate/?uri=http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/math200b.htm
and other types of errors:
E.g:
You're missing
<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css">
because you use inline style at line 228
http://www.validome.org/validate/?uri=http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/missing-greater-than-sign-markup.html
Line 11, Column 24: unclosed end-tag (">" missing)
[1]Firefox HTML VALIDATOR add-on
http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/
[2]: How 4 different markup validators handle 139 markup errors:
http://www.validome.org/lang/en/errors/ALL
season's greetings, Gérard