FF not showing images in Print Preview
Jack Gillis
me as a result of an inquiry.
http://www.wncrmls.com/wnc/maildoc/a005n56413.html
When I choose Print Print Preview, the first listing and its associated
photograps show up just fine. The photos associated with the second listing
do not. No little box with a red x shows up either. Under IE, all photos
show up.
FF's Print Previes shows the number of pages as 5 where IE's shows them as
6.
To further compound the problem, the last set of photos don't print when I
try File/Print even though the non-print screen view of the site shows them.
Something is amiss here. Can some one help me get FF to display and
Barbara
There are some sites that just won't work with the FF Print Preview. I
report all that I find.
Barbara
--
Using WindowsXP SP2 Home Edition Firefox 1.5.0.7, TB 1.5.0.7
Jack Gillis
"Barbara" <junkgr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bcydnZL7MueBytDY...@mozilla.org...
I truly believe that. But, as I said, when I try to print directly using
File/Print without going through Print Prieview, the last set of photos do
not get printed.
Go figure!
Ed Mullen
Go figure more. Reading this thread I decided to try it. Clicked File
- Print Preview in SeaMonkey. Tried it ten times on different pages,
including local pages on my hard drive. Crashed SM every time. Not pretty.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
Arne Hamre
http://validator.w3.org/ reports 561 errors on this page. While a lot of
these errors are repetitions (i.e. samme error over an dover), there are
a couple of MAJOR mistakes;
No Character Encoding Found! Falling back to UTF-8.
No DOCTYPE found! Attempting validation with HTML 4.01 Transitional.
Don't expect too much from sites like this.
--
Arne
Jack Gillis
"Ed Mullen" <e...@edmullen.net> wrote in message
news:65ydnZ9BB_7o_tDY...@mozilla.org...
Thanks Ed. Now I just have to figure out what SeaMonkey is. :)
David McRitchie
Most likely you have external images suppressed.
http://www.wncrmls.com/wnc/maildoc/a005n56413.html
show an IP address as 64.233.179.104+1
There are images like
http://66.192.83.8/wnc/jpg/358131.jpg not on same site
http://www.wncrmls.com/wnc/jpg7/358131.jpg same site
Tools, Options, Content
now has only one option for loading images. type about:config
on the location bar and filter on: network.image.imageBehavior
a value of 0 will load all images. A value of 1 might have been
set prior to Fx2 to load images for originating site only, A value of 2
prevents images from loading.
If you installed the Web Developer Extension when you installed
Firefox or later on
Tools, Web Developer, Images, Disable Images, ...
The fourth level after Tools is kind of hard to spot but you
have the choices there of
All Images
External Images
Image Animations
I would make sure that none of them are checked.
The key to interpreting values in your about:config preferences is in
http://kb.mozillazine.org/About:config_entries
A less likely possibility:
Is it a PostScript printer, I seem to remember from years ago
print and images disappearing if parts extended beyond margins.
I think PostScript printers might really only be used with Macs
now since inkjet printing and TrueType fonts can be scaled.
--
David McRitchie, Firefox customizations/extensions notes, see
http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
Jack Gillis
I have filtered about:config to find the two items you mentioned below.
Neither appear to be there. Can I add them? Or, should I try to install FF2
from scratch?
Thanks again.
"David McRitchie" <nospam@nospam> wrote in message
news:YZqdnXVJ8PeiQ9DY...@mozilla.org...
David McRitchie
> I have filtered about:config to find the two items you mentioned below.
> Neither appear to be there. Can I add them? Or, should I try to install FF2
> from scratch?
Hi Jack,
I only mentioned placing one item into the filter of about:config and
that was
network.image.imageBehavior
I can't imagine it not being there. Make sure you don't have leading
or trailing characters like spaces as that would cause it to be not found.
Just trying imagebehavior should work in this case.
Jack Gillis
here is the only one I found that is even close.
network.image.warnAboutImages
There are no other network.image entries that I see.
"David McRitchie" <nospam@nospam> wrote in message
news:dc-dndXYuYAyeNDY...@mozilla.org...
Jack Gillis
the description of the config entries.
"David McRitchie" <nospam@nospam> wrote in message
news:YZqdnXVJ8PeiQ9DY...@mozilla.org...
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
The images are being served by another server. Make sure you have "only
from originating server" UNchecked in the image preferences. The page
loads 100% here as well as 100% of the images. All print here just fine
in FF 2.0. If you have any image extensions installed then disable them
temporarily. FF 2.0 makes this quite easy to do now.
--
Jay Garcia Netscape/Mozilla Champion
UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org
Jack Gillis
"Jay Garcia" <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote in message
news:oeqdnchXYo77aNDY...@mozilla.org...
Thank you very much, Jay. I am glad to hear that the page loads and PRINTS
fine there. Surely that means I should be able to get to do so here.
I do not seem to find the 'only from originating server' item you described.
Is it under FF2's Options somewhere?
Thanks again.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
Hmmm, I didn't bother to look .. bad !! It's not there but under "Load
images automatically" click the "Exceptions" button and see if that site
is listed and possibly "blocked".
Alex K.
> "Jack Gillis" wrote...
>> I have filtered about:config to find the two items you mentioned below.
>> Neither appear to be there. Can I add them? Or, should I try to install FF2
>> from scratch?
>
> Hi Jack,
> I only mentioned placing one item into the filter of about:config and
> that was
> network.image.imageBehavior
>
> I can't imagine it not being there. Make sure you don't have leading
> or trailing characters like spaces as that would cause it to be not found.
> Just trying imagebehavior should work in this case.
While I don't believe that this is the cause of the OP's problem, as I
seems as though he can see the image in the normal view of the browser,
but does not get some of them in print preview or when printing. At
least that is what I get here, on my system.
That being said, regarding the image preference:
Try permissions.default.image, instead.
The network.image.imageBehavior pref has been replaced, according to its
entry in the knowledgebase:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Network.image.imageBehavior
"Background
Until recently, this preference determined whether or not images loaded
in the browser. Specifically, it allowed the user to allow all images,
allow all images except third-party images, or block images entirely.
This preference replaced advanced.always_load_images when Mozilla hit
Milestone 16 in June 2000, but was replaced by permissions.default.image
in December 2004. "
For the new pref, permissions.default.image, see this page:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Permissions.default.image
... "Here, the permissions preference takes over image behavior duties
from network.image.imageBehavior. It works essentially the same way as
the old preference, except the possible values are different (and in
different order).
Possible values and their effects
1 Allow all images to load, regardless of origin. (Default)
2 Block all images from loading.
3 Prevent third-party images from loading.
Caveats
* If you set network.image.imageBehavior, its value will be migrated
to permissions.default.image (and then cleared). "
The statement above is why you would not find the imageBehaviour entry,
if I'm reading it right.
--
Alex K.
Jack Gillis
"Alex K." <akfr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:w9udnc_ujrhWn9PY...@mozilla.org...
> David McRitchie wrote:
>> "Jack Gillis" wrote...
>>> I have filtered about:config to find the two items you mentioned below.
>>> Neither appear to be there. Can I add them? Or, should I try to install
>>> FF2
>>> from scratch?
>>
>> Hi Jack,
>> I only mentioned placing one item into the filter of about:config and
>> that was
>> network.image.imageBehavior
>>
>> I can't imagine it not being there. Make sure you don't have leading
>> or trailing characters like spaces as that would cause it to be not
>> found.
>> Just trying imagebehavior should work in this case.
>
> While I don't believe that this is the cause of the OP's problem, as I
> seems as though he can see the image in the normal view of the browser,
> but does not get some of them in print preview or when printing. At
> least that is what I get here, on my system.
That is indeed the case. Thank you very much for understanding and stating
it clearer than I did.
Jack Gillis
Alex,
A follow up. I just went to a machine almost identical to the intial one,
both running XP Home SP2 except for FF 1.05.3 on the first.
The 'for the originating website only' item is unchecked.
Still, the web pages loads completely but printing it still is short the
last group of images. I am beginning to feel the problem might lie with XP,
of course that is just a wild, frustrated feeling right now. Or, as someone
pointed out, a problem with the web page itself but that is hard to believe
since you were able to view and print the whole page.
I am curious to know how many pages show up under your Print Preview. Mine
shows 5. IE7 shows six.
Go figure.
Thanks again.
Alex K.
I believe you have, perhaps, confused me with one of the other
responders. I see exactly the same thing that you described, that is,
viewing the page normally, I *do* see all the graphics. When I go to
print preview, I *do not* see the last block of graphics.
Although I don't believe it to be related to the problem, for the
record, my setting for the preference, permissions.default.image, is 1,
as described in my previous post: allowing "all images to load,
regardless of origin." I do not use any ad blocking extensions,
software, etc. My hosts file contains nothing beyond the standard
"127.0.0.1 localhost" entry.
I don't believe these to be related, as the normal view does show *all*
the images, *nothing* is being blocked. The issue is what appears in
print preview. Note: I have not tried to print the pages, as, yet
again, I'm out of ink. I'm going to have to teach my son how to print
just the information he wants, rather than entire web pages, in full
color. :-(
With my print preview Scale setting to 100%, it shows a page count of 5.
I did try playing with the scale setting, as, in the past, there have
been problems with pages rendering properly for printing, depending on
the scale setting. I did not find any difference in this case, however.
One thing that I did note, is that they are using separate CSS
statements for printing. I'm not an expert at it, but I'm wondering if
they have done, or not done, something with the CSS that is effecting
that last block of images.
I tried looking at the source & comparing the code for the other block
of images with the block that does not print, but nothing jumped out at
me immediately. As others have pointed out, there are numerous
validation errors on this page.
Hmm, ok, I spent some more time looking at this & researching. I'm
wondering if it has to do with their use of the <tbody> tags.
According to http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_tbody.asp :
"Definition and Usage
Defines a table body.
The thead, tfoot and tbody elements enable you to group rows in a table.
When you create a table, you might want to have a header row, some rows
with data, and a row with totals at bottom. This division enables
browsers to support scrolling of table bodies independently of the table
header and footer. When long tables are printed, the table header and
footer information may be repeated on each page that contains table data.
Note: If you use the thead, tfoot and tbody elements, you must use every
element. They should appear in this order: <thead>, <tfoot> and <tbody>,
so that browsers can render the foot before receiving all the data. You
must use these tags within the table element.
Note: The <thead>,<tbody> and <tfoot> elements are seldom used, because
of bad browser support. Expect this to change in future versions of XHTML."
Searching the source for the page for the page in question reveals
numerous uses of the <tbody> tag, however there are *no* <tfoot> or
<thead> tags at all, thus violating the standard.
Since the page coder did not use the proper implementation of them, all
bets are off when it comes to printing with FF, as the code does not
comply with the standard. From the quote above, "If you use the thead,
tfoot and tbody elements, you must use every element."
Of course, I could be completely wrong about this, I'm not an HTML code
guru (yet), although the standard seems pretty clear about this issue.
IE has, unfortunately, allowed the propagation of an uncountable number
poorly coded sites that "magically" appear just fine in IE. As we well
know, IE will attempt to "interpret" what the code should mean. FF
strives to be strictly standards compliant. Where a page can get away
with poor code in IE, the same may not (probably not!) render correctly
in FF.
Having said all that, there are issues with printing in FF. It is an
area where FF still needs work. I have noticed, generally, that I
encounter far fewer problems on standards-compliant sites, though.
If you go to the main page of that site: http://www.wncrmls.com , you
will see this statement under Site Information:
"This system is compatible with Internet Explorer (Ver. 5-6) and
Netscape Communicator (Ver. 8)"
My suggestion, at this point, is to notify the webmaster of the problem
& suggest that they comply with the standards. You might point out to
them that, according to most press accounts, FF continues to gain in
popularity & it would make sense to iron out the problems. In a polite
way, of course. :-)
Another option would be to "Report Broken Website". On the menu bar,
choose Help >> Report Broken Web Site.
In the meantime, perhaps the IETab extension might be useful. I've not
used it myself yet. I'm curious how the print mechanism in FF will
render it if you are using the IE engine. Perhaps I will play with it
later.
Ok, its later now. :-)
So I played with it & if I use the IE engine on that page, then the
print preview does display properly, showing *all* the images, for a
total of 6 pages. It makes sense, since I assume its using the IE print
preview function.
You can get IETab here:
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1419/
And information on usage & known issues at the homepage:
http://ietab.mozdev.org/
--
Alex K.
Jack Gillis
I appologize for my mixup confusing you with someone else about printing.
I did as you suggested and contacted the webmaster as politely as I could.
Haven't heard anything back yet but I didn't really expect to.
IE Tab certainly solved the problem with that site as well as at least one
more I visit almost daily and I thank you for that tip.
As far as I am concerned, the problem can rest where it is for now.
Alex K.
> Thank you once again Alex.
>
> I appologize for my mixup confusing you with someone else about printing.
No need to apologize, it happens from time to time, and I took no offense.
> I did as you suggested and contacted the webmaster as politely as I could.
> Haven't heard anything back yet but I didn't really expect to.
>
> IE Tab certainly solved the problem with that site as well as at least one
> more I visit almost daily and I thank you for that tip.
I'm glad it worked out for you.
--
Alex K.
Judith
forums
thanks a lot
Le 10 nov. 06, à 14:12, Alex K. a écrit :
> _______________________________________________
> support-firefox mailing list
> support...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-firefox
>