A
a_lost_packet_
Guest
Just curious, has anyone tested this with IE8's site compatibility mode turned on and turned off? Does the text field still have display issues under both settings?
a_lost_packet_":kp9kfp3a said:Just curious, has anyone tested this with IE8's site compatibility mode turned on and turned off? Does the text field still have display issues under both settings?
Mee_n_Mac":2o87au5p said:You might want to e-mail MS and tell them IE bites.
MeteorWayne":2bpbrmuo said:Actually, I've started using it. I hadn't noticed for a while that it was even there.
I now insert a blank line above and below any that I use it in, that seems to be a workaround for the IE issue.
a_lost_packet_":1o276zhk said:Sample for my check:
TEST TEST TEST
TEST [super]TEST[/super]TEST
TEST TEST TEST
TEST [sub]TEST[/sub] TEST
TEST TEST TEST
Ah, I think I see the problem then. It's not giving enough line separation between lines, not the field height itself. Checking.
test test test
test [super]test[/super] test
test test test
test [sub]test[/sub] test
test test test
a_lost_packet_":2qmtvpxl said:MeteorWayne":2qmtvpxl said:Actually, I've started using it. I hadn't noticed for a while that it was even there.
I now insert a blank line above and below any that I use it in, that seems to be a workaround for the IE issue.
For some reason, it's not making the text field display big enough to handle the displacement. Dangit.. I forget the term atm.. kerning is letter separation. super/sub would be.... _____ displacement. /whatever
Ah, I think I see the problem then. It's not giving enough line separation between lines, not the field height itself. Checking.
a_lost_packet_":1qbo8odb said:Just curious, has anyone tested this with IE8's site compatibility mode turned on and turned off? Does the text field still have display issues under both settings?
adrenalynn":pjslzqoq said:Different rendering engines. How you render a webpage is terribly complex. When I was an architect at Attachment AAC, and we were working on Pathway Access, (an early browser, pre-IE), an entire building full of architects would argue over how to render a single element for days. And it's gotten far more complicated since then.
doublehelix":fsz2p3i5 said:Must be an IE8 issue, ...
-dh
adrenalynn":22rw1zqm said:It's your browser doing the rendering. The http server neither knows nor cares what those tags mean. The database server needs to know what the equivalent bbcode tag is in html, but makes no other decisions about it.
A [ tag ] [ / tag ] gets converted at time of delivery to < tag > < / tag >from the database server to you over http. It is your browser's responsibility to say "Oh, I know what a < tag > < / tag > means! My rendering engine is supposed to puke it to the display _this way_".
My browser and your browser apparently can't agree on the correct way to vomit. Mine does it in a pretty sort of way, yours does it in a half-arsed couldn't be bothered to make sure it'd look right sort of way. Welcome to IE!
Mee_n_Mac":x0q7pwme said:..The above was my understanding. What's still a mystery to me is how a_l_p's text (with supers and subs) displays just dandy on my PC using my browser but my input, presumably using the same tags, displays like crap on the exact same machine at the same time. I can even copy and paste from a_l_p's post and have it display fine. It's as if the [ tag ] [ / tag ] from my machine gets converted differently than his [ tag ] [ / tag ] at SDC's server.