I am learning Dreamweaver MX (on my own) and I'm using cascading style sheets to apply my background image. When I validate a page, Dreamweaver tells me this is incompatible in IE and Netscape. But I've seen cascading style sheets all over the place.

Can anyone clue me in?

Thanks,

SullyD

p.s. woo hoo....first post on here!

Not really into web development, just want a feel of the new forum.

There are two classes of people in the world. Those that can count, those that cannot; and those that do not know the difference between the two.

Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal

Thanks Sabertooth,

I felt really lonely here!

SullyD

I thought I'd make my mark too, since two's company, three's a crowd :-D

As for the question, I personally find it easier to develop webpages with M$ Frontpage or Netscape composer. However I tend to find it difficult to think about what content to include. :S

I know that doesn't really help your question, sorry lol.

ER4S3R.

Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal

ER4S3R,

I'm new to web design and I'm learning so I can create my own site.

I haven't tried either of those programs but I do have frontpage. I began with dreamweaver and I like the way it handles the entire sight, not to mention it's compatibility with flash. My site is going to be a fairly large site ...it'll probably be about 2-300 pages with almost as many images (I'm an artist/writer...no problem finding content..lol)

How is Frontpage with site organization? I could give it a try, but I've already invested a lot of time learning Dreamweaver. Will it really be worth the switch?

SullyD

Sully-
No, it is not worth the switch. I would say that dreamweaver is generally considered superior to frontpage, although nothing can beat just learning HTML and CSS and doing away with WYSIWYG.

On to the question...Dreamweaver is incorrect if it is saying that background-image is not supported in IE or NS. It's part of CSS and I've used it in several pages that tested OK in NS6+ and IE4+.

I suspect that something else is going on here, but I'm not familiar enough with dreamweaver to make an educated guess.

Use the w3.org validator for complete conformity.
frontpage rant

Good luck,
-SN

Wow, I was bored, and all the forums I frequented hardly moved. I saw this forum, and was like, "whoa, am I seeing things?" hehe

Anyway, IE and netscape "translate" files a little differently. In school, I had to write a version for IE, a 2nd version for netscape, and then program the website to detect your browser and show the relevent version.

As for your authoring software, you could always try different programs to see what you like. Although I'm not sure...I believe frontpage requires special website accounts (the place i pay for web services has a different plan that gives accounts where you can use frontpage on). I believe when I set up my account, I had to say whether or not i'd be using frontpage, since the directory set up is different.

Hi Sully,

If you have already spent some time and got the hang of using dreamweaver, by all means I think you should stick to it, as it's obviously a superior program than Frontpage.

I have used Frontpage to do a personal website with quite a few pages (more than 30). TBH not knowing html was not an issue at all, it was very straight-forward as it was a WYSIWYG program like our friend SN explains lol. Everything from frames, links, pics, forms, tables, graphics (per page) took a matter of minutes to put together. You can create entire photo galleries in no time at all.

From experience, I know adding flash based content is compatible. Despite all this since you've invested a lot of time learning Dreamweaver I say carry on, but if you decide to switch later for any reason, Frontpage is a good option.

M$ Frontpage Features

LOL SN, love it how you bad-mouth a program than link it to your own rant again. :-D

ER4S3R.
Hope That Helps.

Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal

Are you using DwMx 2004 or just DwMx? I just made a test page with a css specifying the background image and I'm not getting any errors here. I'm running Mx 2004, if you’re using Dreamweaver Mx that may be the issue.

Sandman

P.S. Stick with Dreamweaver, it's an extremely powerful program. FrontPage can't touch it LOL.

er4s3r-
I've had so many frontpage rants over the years that the most difficult thing is deciding which one to link to:-) As anonproxy argued, I may be unnecessarily prejudiced against wysiwyg editors, having not used one for several years.

Anyhow, as I admitted, wysiwyg editors have their target demographic...If you've used them and are a satisified customer, more power to you. I just think that a lot of people use them that would probably save time by just biting the bullet and learning HTML.

-S "Different strokes for different folks" N

Don't believe what Dreamweaver says - it is not really a standard just a guide. The reality is that all standards right now are really just guides. As a rule of thumb, if a feature works in both Mozilla (or any browser which uses Gecko as its render library, like Firebird, now Firefox) and IE, it is pretty much standard.

Test the page in a browser yourself if you have any doubts.

Thanks for the responses Everyone,

SN,

I know some basics of html. That's how I started...with a book. I'm not planning to make a living creating websites (at least not yet), so learning html to be able to write my own code isn't in my schedule. One of the things I like about Dreamweaver is the ability to go back and forth between the code and the page. If I highlight something in the page, I can see whats hilighted in the code... that's how I'm learning. I went to w3.org validator and tested my home page... I posted the results below.

Sandman,

I am using Dreamweaver MX, but I believe I fixed the css errors, as I'm not getting them anymore (by chance). I changed the settings in my templates. Is it a problem to use a css for the background alone? That's the only attribute I've assigned.

Now, here's where I'm baffled... I test my site in IE, Netscape, Mozilla, Opera, Avant, and 4CVision.... They all seem to work fine! But I still get alot of errors when I validate.

These are the results from w3.org validator:

"Below are the results of attempting to parse this document with an SGML parser.

This page is not Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional!

Line 31, column 28: there is no attribute "HEIGHT" (explain...).
<table width="714" height="1157" border="0">
^
Line 33, column 20: there is no attribute "BORDERCOLOR" (explain...).
<tr bordercolor="#FFFFFF">
^
Line 34, column 108: required attribute "ALT" not specified (explain...).
...in_Logo.gif" width="707" height="218"></div></td>
^
Line 40, column 46: there is no attribute "BORDERCOLOR" (explain...).
... width="36" height="112" bordercolor="#333333"> 
^
Line 43, column 72: there is no attribute "ALIGN" (explain...).
...n="middle" bordercolor="#333333"> <pre align="center"> </pre></td>
^
Line 50, column 158: required attribute "ALT" not specified (explain...).
...eight="212" border="0" usemap="#Map2"></div></td>
^
Line 83, column 97: required attribute "ALT" not specified (explain...).
...height="187" border="0" usemap="#Map"></p>
^
Line 147, column 67: required attribute "ALT" not specified (explain...).
...ct" coords="0,3,115,210" href="pages/Computer.htm">"

And here are Dreamweaver's results (edited... I have alot of duplicate errors of the following):

* In TAG: area the following required attributes are missing: alt

* In HTML 4.0, FONT is deprecated. It may become obsolete in future versions, consider using style sheets instead.

After I validate my entire site through Dreamweaver here are some of the errors that concern me:

* "back to galleries.swf" is not valid value for the "src" attribute in any of the currently active versions.

* "100" is not valid value for the "width" attribute in any of the currently active versions.

Should I not worry about these errors? I don't want to put time into a site that I'll have to do over. I already have at least 40 hours into this site (including preparation of my assets...lots of artwork)

Any input is appreciated

SullyD

p.s. This is interesting...I'm usually in the XP forum giving advice. It's odd being the newbie that goes "duh"...lol

Sully-
As you have already figured out, most of the errors you posted don't create functionality problems for 99% of your users. I apologize for not mentioning that w3.org's validator is very, very strict (almost as strict as anonproxy's critical eye:-). It's somewhat rare for a page go through without any errors. Even then, there's no guarantee that it will work on IE or NS, because they don't necessarily adhere to those standards, opting instead to create their own.

* "back to galleries.swf" is not valid value for the "src" attribute in any of the currently active versions.

I would guess your flash file should not have spaces...Is this in an embed tag?

* "100" is not valid value for the "width" attribute in any of the currently active versions.

It might be complaining about quotation marks (although that would seem strange considering XML requires them...) Take off the quotation marks and see if it changes. It may also be complaining about the lack of units...Try putting "px" after. My only other thought is that you may have an item whose width you've defined as '100' nested in another item whose width is less than that. See if changing it to a percentage helps.

Most of the w3.org errors are just complaining that you didn't put in a required attribute (ALT, for example), or you put one in that isn't officially supported (height, for example). It is generally better to use stylesheets than the FONT tag (as well as the majority of the formatting attributes you have in DIVs and TABLEs), but for now (and probably the next few years), you won't lose functionality.

We're trying to move towards stylesheets because they aid in separating content from presentation, making the code more maintainable and flexible.

Really, that's not that many errors...Way to go dreamweaver!:-)

As for the "learning HTML" debate, to each his own, but I asked myself "Do I have time NOT to learn HTML?" With the time spent learning software and debugging pages with unintelligible code, I figured it would be faster to spend the 4-6 hours needed to get a decent handle on HTML and CSS (you don't have to memorize each tag or anything, just know the concepts.) I totally get where you're coming from, and I'm sure you're making the decision that fits your needs.

Good luck,
-SN

All the errors you posted are really just warnings. Any browser with CSS support will handle them properly. It's the validator's (parser's) job to enforce the most inane details. It is the browser's job to display the page. Focus on what the browser does and making your format compatible. What is compatible is the realistic standard.

I don't believe you need to test with Avant or 4CVision. Avant seems to be a wrapper around IE and its associated libraries (put to good use). 4CVision also seems to just import IE into a COM object, via new window. Without the technical details, I believe these browsers are very similar if not the same as IE.

SN,

I'll try your suggestions pertaining to the errors. And your words are definitely encouraging...thanks. I might even dig my html book out again....4-6 hours, huh? lol

Anon,

Thanks for the info... I already had Avant and 4CVision on my pc, so I was using them. But, I can eliminate them from my browser list and stop wasting time checking them. and I figured as much with the errors, that if it works in the browser, it should be okay. I needed to be sure.

Much appreciated,

SullyD

"Is it a problem to use a css for the background alone?"

No not at all. You can have as many or as few attributes in your css as you want.

As far as the errors your getting you don't have much to worry about. If it passes Dreamweavers parser and looks\works good in all the major browsers your good to go.

"I just think that a lot of people use them that would probably save time by just biting the bullet and learning HTML.”

If you use Dreamweaver long enough it will basically teach you html. Myself I do the bulk work with Dreamweaver and any final tweaks\edits are done in notepad. You are right though, it does make you faster. But so will using a well designed app such as Dreamweaver along with your knowledge of html.

Sandman