Here is my site. Envisioned (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.structuralstudios.com/envisioned">http://www.structuralstudios.com/envisioned</a><!-- m -->) <br />
<br />
Now in Netscape and Opera, it looks horribly messed up. And I can't find out why. Can anyone help?<!--content-->First off, in your index, you need to define the doctype as HTML 4.01 Frameset. That leaves you with only six errors in your HTML (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.structuralstudios.com%2Fenvisioned%2F&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=HTML+4.01+Frameset">http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... 1+Frameset</a><!-- m -->) rather than the sixteen errors using the HTML 4.01 Transitional doctype (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.structuralstudios.com%2Fenvisioned%2F">http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... isioned%2F</a><!-- m -->). I don't know enough about frames to really help you with the remaining errors, but I hope that will clear a few things up for you.<br />
<br />
Your page looks fine to me in IE 6.0 and Opera 7.0. I see that you have a big problem in Mozilla 1.3, but I'm still looking at the code trying to see what would cause it.<!--content-->Ok, here is what I think the problem is: when you absolutely position a block-level element (such as <div>) you are taking it out of the normal flow. It has no effect on later siblings. You are positioning the <div> absolutely in relation to the <td> container, but it is taken out of the normal flow of the document and so it just takes up as much room as it needs and is "on top" of everything after it. I'm not sure I'm making much sense here, but you can go the CSS-2 spec (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.html#positioning-scheme">http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.h ... ing-scheme</a><!-- m -->) for the official definitions on positioning. I'm also not sure if the Mozilla behavior is proper or not. The way I am reading the spec, it would seem that Mozilla is, in fact, behaving properly and Opera and IE are not. I'm also not sure how to accomplish what you're doing using a different method. Hopefully someone has an idea.<!--content-->yes mozilla and Netscape are the best browsers out there. you page is messed up because you have empty table cells and good browsers won't render tables that are empty. also you have a lot of line breaks which maybe causing half your problems.<br />
<br />
none of this<br />
<br />
<td><br />
<img><br />
</td><br />
<br />
they have to be on one line<br />
<br />
<td><img></td><br />
<br />
yes your postitioning has a lot to be desired. use relative if you want to go that way. you use a table than yo utell the div tags to go from the top, the div tags don't care what is in the way as it is doing what it is told.<!--content-->Where is a good place to learn about relative positioning? All I've seen is absolute. Thanks for the help guys. Very appreciated.<!--content-->look at <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.w3.org">www.w3.org</a><!-- w --><!--content-->Ok, I fixed it so it looks the same in Explorer, Netscape, and Opera.<!--content-->>> Ok, I fixed it so it looks the same in Explorer, Netscape, and Opera. <<<br />
<br />
Now go back and fix it so there are no errors.<!--content-->
<br />
Now in Netscape and Opera, it looks horribly messed up. And I can't find out why. Can anyone help?<!--content-->First off, in your index, you need to define the doctype as HTML 4.01 Frameset. That leaves you with only six errors in your HTML (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.structuralstudios.com%2Fenvisioned%2F&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=HTML+4.01+Frameset">http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... 1+Frameset</a><!-- m -->) rather than the sixteen errors using the HTML 4.01 Transitional doctype (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.structuralstudios.com%2Fenvisioned%2F">http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... isioned%2F</a><!-- m -->). I don't know enough about frames to really help you with the remaining errors, but I hope that will clear a few things up for you.<br />
<br />
Your page looks fine to me in IE 6.0 and Opera 7.0. I see that you have a big problem in Mozilla 1.3, but I'm still looking at the code trying to see what would cause it.<!--content-->Ok, here is what I think the problem is: when you absolutely position a block-level element (such as <div>) you are taking it out of the normal flow. It has no effect on later siblings. You are positioning the <div> absolutely in relation to the <td> container, but it is taken out of the normal flow of the document and so it just takes up as much room as it needs and is "on top" of everything after it. I'm not sure I'm making much sense here, but you can go the CSS-2 spec (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.html#positioning-scheme">http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.h ... ing-scheme</a><!-- m -->) for the official definitions on positioning. I'm also not sure if the Mozilla behavior is proper or not. The way I am reading the spec, it would seem that Mozilla is, in fact, behaving properly and Opera and IE are not. I'm also not sure how to accomplish what you're doing using a different method. Hopefully someone has an idea.<!--content-->yes mozilla and Netscape are the best browsers out there. you page is messed up because you have empty table cells and good browsers won't render tables that are empty. also you have a lot of line breaks which maybe causing half your problems.<br />
<br />
none of this<br />
<br />
<td><br />
<img><br />
</td><br />
<br />
they have to be on one line<br />
<br />
<td><img></td><br />
<br />
yes your postitioning has a lot to be desired. use relative if you want to go that way. you use a table than yo utell the div tags to go from the top, the div tags don't care what is in the way as it is doing what it is told.<!--content-->Where is a good place to learn about relative positioning? All I've seen is absolute. Thanks for the help guys. Very appreciated.<!--content-->look at <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.w3.org">www.w3.org</a><!-- w --><!--content-->Ok, I fixed it so it looks the same in Explorer, Netscape, and Opera.<!--content-->>> Ok, I fixed it so it looks the same in Explorer, Netscape, and Opera. <<<br />
<br />
Now go back and fix it so there are no errors.<!--content-->