What are the differences between the Javascript and CSS used in IE and those described in the standards?

Question

I need to figure out the scope of the changes that would need to take place to make a website that was only IE compliant completely standards compliant to ensure that all browsers view the page properly. The AJAX calls are a good example of what I am looking for. At first I thought document.all would be a problem, but it seems that document.all renders false in NS browsers but document.all.elemName works, so I would not consider that a difference between the two.

Answer 1

There are some online resources:



Some IE CSS bugs...

http://www.webcredible.co.uk/user-friendly-resources/css/internet-explorer.shtml



IE bugs in general...

http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/compatibility.html



However, the scope of the issues is so extensive that it really requires books. I recommend:



CSS...

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/csstdg3/



JavaScript...

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/jscript5/



As for using document.all, it's not a good idea, but...

http://weblogs.asp.net/jgalloway/archive/2005/08/07/421798.aspx



If you run your site through the W3C's CSS validator, you'll find the IE flaws more quickly.



http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/



For JavaScript, you might try:

http://www.jslint.com/

Answer 2

You need to decide if you want a standards compliant website and/or a multiple browser compatible website. These are are 2 very different tasks and both are difficult to achieve. I don't mean to be vague or discouraging, as your task is noble and applaudable, but the question you asked is not easily answered by a few bullet points.



Your assumption that making your site standards compliant will allow all browsers to show the page correctly is incorrect. The W3C has defined standards for HTML/DOM/EcmaScript(JavaScript)/CSS, however no single browser has yet to impement all of the defined standards and browsers that claim to support the same standard specifications do so differently so they often do not show the page the same. This is a great source of frustration for all site developers.



No one will be able to answer this without intimate knowledge of your site. You have to determine what your goal is: standards compliance and/or browser compatibility and learn the standards. With these in hand only you can assess your effort based on your goals. To that end, I have found w3schools to be very useful site in finding out what is supported by which browsers. There are great HTML, JavaScript, DOM, and CSS reference sections noting browswer support and W3C compliance or not.



As far as document.all, don't use that if you don't have to, and you should not have to. That will require ugly "is supported" checking or worse browser type/version checking. Use document.childNodes or document.getElementsByTagName() or document.getElementsById() depending on your needs. I would encourage you to use a doctype of strict or transitional if you are not already and use HTML,EcmaScript, and CSS validation tools to validate your conformance.



You may also find use of the Prototype api will help a great deal with your Javascript. It is not too hard to fit into existing implementations.

Answer 3

As a non-Christian, I question my astounding to respond to this question. in case you have a rock on your hand, there is not one hundred% conclusive evidence that it exists. somewhat, there is not one hundred% conclusive evidence which you exist. perhaps each little thing that comes jointly to kind the physique, the techniques and the existence is only area of one's very own (pre-latest) mind's eye. In different words 'i think of, subsequently i'm'. anyhow, I digress. even although, there is something that I easily have faith in now. it is not a deity, even even though it is likewise something that I easily have in no way seen, and subsequently have no conclusive info of, yet I strongly have faith it exists. this is a scripture, latest in actually all of us. it is not written, and would in no way BE written. There are only no words that accurately describe what the scripture says, with the objective to attempt and write it or communicate it would be impossible. the only thank you to nicely known the scripture is via all of our six human senses, maximum of all the way via feeling it. by skill of 'feeling', i'm bearing on the 6th, the 'feeling' this is self reliant of the sense of touch. there have been some human beings in the previous who've tried to jot down this scripture, however the info shows this is often mistranslated from the uncooked feeling it communicates. It can not be defined, it may basically be extensive-unfold. there is basically one way of getting to nicely known it, and that's via love. as quickly as we learn how to love, we've the talents to 'examine' this, and all of us recognize it in each little thing we see that isn't guy-made. So who 'wrote' this scripture on our hearts and in our spirits? From my Atheistic opinion, this is a factor of Nature, yet a Theist will characteristic the God(ess) they have faith in because of the fact the author. even although, by skill of understanding the scripture, this is going to become glaring that there is no count who or what produced it, basically the message itself is substantial. think of of a college room. all the youngsters have distinctive mothers and dads, yet they are all there taking an identical lesson. we are all toddlers of distinctive deities, however the scripture to benefit is an identical, and all too often, lots of the youngsters have forgotten the language the lesson is held in. this is the language they have been born to. an astounding question (((((((woman M))))))) Your husbunny