webpage help pleaseeaase

nelsogl · Post by **nelsogl** » Wed Oct 29, 2003 9:28 pm

Can anyone help
I have created a simple webpage using MS word, looks fine in Internet Explorer, although in Netscape, everything is out of alignment...
What do I have to do so that it looks good in both browsers?
Its on the net at
http://www.gjnmusic.com

anyone.......
cheers
Glen

**Sponsor:**

dusty_bin · Post by **dusty_bin** » Wed Oct 29, 2003 9:43 pm

It looks quite nice. The very first website I did was in MS Word and it also looked fine in Explorer. Every other browser made it look horrid. Problem was solved by importing it into Microsoft Frontpage and using that for design.

MS Word creates a load of unnecessary junk when it makes the HTML. I am no HTML prgrammer so I just go with what works!

BTW. you might want to run your spell checker over the site: 'liaze' is an obvious clanger, 'liaise' works much better. There are others, but either Word or Frontpage will get 'em, if you give them the chance!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:44 am

Indeed, indeed...
Don't use MS Word for making a website. It's the biggest mistake you can make. And it's MS's biggest mistake to even have put that function in the software.

The page looks nice. It's basic HTML. I don't know if you are a bit familiar with HTML, but you can make it look just the same AND working in all browsers if you code the whole thing in Notepad or Wordpad with an external stylesheet. The stylesheet isn't basic HTML, but very easy and quick to learn. And it gives you loads of opportunities withouth the crap that MS Word puts there. PM me if you need some help.

And please, take that 'Viewed best in Internet Explorer' away. It looks very unprofessional.

Hank W. · Post by **Hank W.** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:07 pm

nelsogl wrote: What do I have to do so that it looks good in both browsers?

Do it with Front Page or even Netscape Composer. The generated xml code is utter crap and the page is 30x times the size required. And the pictures get converted to some odd format that gobbles up space. Personally when I see pages done with MS word the initial thought to mind is 'Whoever invented this feature ought to be flogged with a horsewhip'.

BTW the site design looks good!

Ace · Post by **Ace** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:11 pm

http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp

Personally I would code a page in text pad, but front page is probably your best bet here. Dont try and get it looking perfect in every browser you'll never succeed. IE Nutscrape and Mozilla should be OK IMO!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:16 pm

olly wrote:http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp

Personally I would code a page in text pad, but front page is probably your best bet here.

Yep, I prefer using a simple text editer, too.
Then you know exactly what's going on and where the errors are (if there are any).

If you check for example the source code of your page, Glen.
It looks totally messy. And the mess of the coding (of which you really need maybe 25%) doesn't add anything to the value of your page.
Like Hank says, it only takes up unnecessary space.

daive · Post by **daive** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:38 pm

Arno wrote:
olly wrote:http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp

Personally I would code a page in text pad, but front page is probably your best bet here.
Yep, I prefer using a simple text editer, too.
Then you know exactly what's going on and where the errors are (if there are any).

If you check for example the source code of your page, Glen.
It looks totally messy. And the mess of the coding (of which you really need maybe 25%) doesn't add anything to the value of your page.
Like Hank says, it only takes up unnecessary space.

I prefer yusing Dreamweaver, very versatile and easy to use software.

Ace · Post by **Ace** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:39 pm

daive wrote:I prefer yusing Dreamweaver, very versatile and easy to use software.

Yeah I've been meaning to get a copy of that. Heard great things about it!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:54 pm

Yeah, I also heard good things about it.
And I know it's all about userfriendliness, but then you're again going to be dependant on the coding that the program does FOR you...

dusty_bin · Post by **dusty_bin** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 1:58 pm

Moving a little off topic though...

If you want to make your website work with Netscape, then get a copy of Frontpage, you can pretty much cut and paste, even import your current document.

In the program you can select for various degrees of compatibility with Netscape, choose one, your site is simple so select an old version of Netscape and 'badda bing'! You will have a website that works. Frontpage also has spelling tools, use 'em!

Now, the purists will whinge, but forget them. If you wanted to learn to code HTML, you would hve already done it... right?
Tools like Frontpage can revolutionise what you can publish, allowing you to see pretty much what will be on the users screen without needing to delve into the arcana!

There are other tools similar to FrontPage, Dreamweaver being one, choose the one that you like best, although the FrontPage interface and the capabilities of the program probably mean that it is a very good first choice. You already know how to use many of the functons from Word.

nelsogl · Post by **nelsogl** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 7:35 pm

Thanks for the help

i downloaded a free trial version of dreamweaver

Not bad at all!

nelsogl · Post by **nelsogl** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 12:39 pm

Thancs
I used dream weaver , seems to look ok in IE although little different in Netscape.

I tink mi speling is ok now

Ace · Post by **Ace** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 12:29 pm

dusty_bin wrote:In the program you can select for various degrees of compatibility with Netscape, choose one, your site is simple so select an old version of Netscape and 'badda bing'!

Dusty makes a good point here, not everyone runs the latest version of Netscape so some things that work in Netscape 8 wont work in Netscape 4.x etc. When testing I find it useful to run an older version of netscape (I think I have 4.8 installed).

stig · Post by **stig** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 12:41 pm

Please note. Not everyone will understand this, but there might be a few. If you don't understand, you should be grateful. There are things in this world you are better off not knowing.

When I want to write HTML ..... I use ed.

(Originally by Patrick J. LoPresti)

================================================================================
ED(1) UNIX Programmer's Manual ED(1)

NAME
ed - text editor

SYNOPSIS
ed [ - ] [ -x ] [ name ]
DESCRIPTION
Ed is the standard text editor.
---

Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first
alphabetically, but because it's the standard. Everyone else loves ed
because it's ED!

"Ed is the standard text editor."

And ed doesn't waste space on my Timex Sinclair. Just look:

-rwxr-xr-x 1 root 24 Oct 29 1929 /bin/ed
-rwxr-xr-t 4 root 1310720 Jan 1 1970 /usr/ucb/vi
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root 5.89824e37 Oct 22 1990 /usr/bin/emacs

Of course, on the system *I* administrate, vi is symlinked to ed.
Emacs has been replaced by a shell script which 1) Generates a syslog
message at level LOG_EMERG; 2) reduces the user's disk quota by 100K;
and 3) RUNS ED!!!!!!

"Ed is the standard text editor."

Let's look at a typical novice's session with the mighty ed:

golem$ ed

?
help
?
?
?
quit
?
exit
?
bye
?
hello?
?
eat flaming death
?
^C
?
^C
?
^D
?

---
Note the consistent user interface and error reportage. Ed is
generous enough to flag errors, yet prudent enough not to overwhelm
the novice with verbosity.

"Ed is the standard text editor."

Ed, the greatest WYGIWYG editor of all.

ED IS THE TRUE PATH TO NIRVANA! ED HAS BEEN THE CHOICE OF EDUCATED
AND IGNORANT ALIKE FOR CENTURIES! ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS
BODILY FLUIDS!! ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! ED MAKES THE SUN
SHINE AND THE BIRDS SING AND THE GRASS GREEN!!

When I use an editor, I don't want eight extra KILOBYTES of worthless
help screens and cursor positioning code! I just want an EDitor!!
Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED!
ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!

TEXT EDITOR.

When IBM, in its ever-present omnipotence, needed to base their
"edlin" on a UNIX standard, did they mimic vi? No. Emacs? Surely
you jest. They chose the most karmic editor of all. The standard.

Ed is for those who can *remember* what they are working on. If you
are an idiot, you should use Emacs. If you are an Emacs, you should
not be vi. If you use ED, you are on THE PATH TO REDEMPTION. THE
SO-CALLED "VISUAL" EDITORS HAVE BEEN PLACED HERE BY ED TO TEMPT THE
FAITHLESS. DO NOT GIVE IN!!! THE MIGHTY ED HAS SPOKEN!!!

==================================================================================

Stig.

ps. This is very old, so my apologies to those who have already seen it.

fionna · Post by **fionna** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 3:08 pm

stig wrote:Please note. Not everyone will understand this, but there might be a few. If you don't understand, you should be grateful. There are things in this world you are better off not knowing.

When I want to write HTML ..... I use ed.

I was going to be a little less of a purist and recommend vi.

Finland Forum

Find information about moving to, living in and life in Finland