Rude answer when I emailed a website that didn't render in F.F.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Rude answer when I emailed a website that didn't render in F.F.

bjo-2
This is the reply that I had from the website when I emailed them to say
that I couldn't get their site to work in my browser . I suggested that
the web designer try it out in browsers other than I.E.
I wonder if anybody would like to contact this person and explain that
it is not the fault of the browser.  My technical terms in explaining
leave a bit to be desired.
Brenda

[hidden email]
Not a very helpful or constructive email.

Please read the minimum system requirements prior to using the website
which can be found at:


https://www.familyrelatives.org/treequest/jsp/customer/pre_res_minsysreq.htm

and as you pointed out the issue lies with your browser as the site does
work
On Nov 30, 2005 09:25 PM
_______________________________________________
mozilla-general mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rude answer when I emailed a website that didn't render in F.F.

Marc Wilson-2
In netscape.public.mozilla.general,  (bjo) wrote in
<dmnoc8$snu$[hidden email]>::

>This is the reply that I had from the website when I emailed them to say
>that I couldn't get their site to work in my browser . I suggested that
>the web designer try it out in browsers other than I.E.
>I wonder if anybody would like to contact this person and explain that
>it is not the fault of the browser.  My technical terms in explaining
>leave a bit to be desired.
>Brenda
>
>[hidden email]
>Not a very helpful or constructive email.
>
>Please read the minimum system requirements prior to using the website
>which can be found at:
>
>
>https://www.familyrelatives.org/treequest/jsp/customer/pre_res_minsysreq.htm
>
>and as you pointed out the issue lies with your browser as the site does
>work
>On Nov 30, 2005 09:25 PM

Works fine in FF 1.5 and in Opera 8.5
--
Marc

At first there was nothing. Then God said 'Let there be light!'
Then there was still nothing. But you could see it.
_______________________________________________
mozilla-general mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rude answer when I emailed a website that didn't render in F.F.

Tom  J
In reply to this post by bjo-2

"bjo" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
news:dmnoc8$snu$[hidden email]...
> This is the reply that I had from the website when I emailed them to
> say that I couldn't get their site to work in my browser . I
> suggested that the web designer try it out in browsers other than
> I.E.
> I wonder if anybody would like to contact this person and explain
> that it is not the fault of the browser.  My technical terms in
> explaining leave a bit to be desired.
> Brenda

I think he may be correct. He says it works with IE 5.5+, Mozilla 1.7+
& Netscape 7+. He's covered 95+% of browsers still in use except FF
and it's still in beta. It has bugs that may never be fixed & from
what I read in these newsgroups, you most likely found one. It does
work in Mozilla.

That said, I wouldn't be the one to convince him otherwise. It took me
4 months to convince a major national corp. that their website was
broken for over 10% of those trying to use it because it gave a 404 if
Flash was not working.

Tom J

>
> [hidden email]
> Not a very helpful or constructive email.
>
> Please read the minimum system requirements prior to using the
> website
> which can be found at:
>
>
> https://www.familyrelatives.org/treequest/jsp/customer/pre_res_minsysreq.htm
>
> and as you pointed out the issue lies with your browser as the site
> does
> work
> On Nov 30, 2005 09:25 PM


_______________________________________________
mozilla-general mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rude answer when I emailed a website that didn't render in F.F.

RJack-10
In reply to this post by bjo-2
bjo wrote:

> This is the reply that I had from the website when I emailed them to say
> that I couldn't get their site to work in my browser . I suggested that
> the web designer try it out in browsers other than I.E.
> I wonder if anybody would like to contact this person and explain that
> it is not the fault of the browser.  My technical terms in explaining
> leave a bit to be desired.
> Brenda
>
> [hidden email]
> Not a very helpful or constructive email.
>
> Please read the minimum system requirements prior to using the website
> which can be found at:
>
>
> https://www.familyrelatives.org/treequest/jsp/customer/pre_res_minsysreq.htm
>
>
> and as you pointed out the issue lies with your browser as the site does
> work On Nov 30, 2005 09:25 PM

That page had some minor faults, on the first page they had a lot more faults.
Just go to validator.w3.org and feed the url of the pages that render badly in
your browser and then send the validator.w3.org urls and tell them that they
have managed to use none-valid code.


 //Aho
_______________________________________________
mozilla-general mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Rude answer when I emailed a website that didn't render in F.F.

bjo-2
J.O. Aho wrote:

> bjo wrote:
>
>>This is the reply that I had from the website when I emailed them to say
>>that I couldn't get their site to work in my browser . I suggested that
>>the web designer try it out in browsers other than I.E.
>>I wonder if anybody would like to contact this person and explain that
>>it is not the fault of the browser.  My technical terms in explaining
>>leave a bit to be desired.
>>Brenda
>>
>>[hidden email]
>>Not a very helpful or constructive email.
>>
>>Please read the minimum system requirements prior to using the website
>>which can be found at:
>>
>>
>>https://www.familyrelatives.org/treequest/jsp/customer/pre_res_minsysreq.htm
>>
>>
>>and as you pointed out the issue lies with your browser as the site does
>>work On Nov 30, 2005 09:25 PM
>
>
> That page had some minor faults, on the first page they had a lot more faults.
> Just go to validator.w3.org and feed the url of the pages that render badly in
> your browser and then send the validator.w3.org urls and tell them that they
> have managed to use none-valid code.
>
>
>  //Aho

Thanks Aho
I've done that now.
Brenda
_______________________________________________
mozilla-general mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-general