Firefox

[Mark Jones]

Is this wrong? (Sorry, I've never seen Hebrew before.)

Note, this page has 31 HTML warnings according to TIDY!

[rea]

I get it, With the help of the editor that display like Firefox, I have watched that what you call (watching the attached screenshoot)

unless they are lacking in overstrike diacritical marks.

Is what I call acent.

For example México is writed like that, not Mexico.

Also I understand now, that you see in this case, instead of México, you see Me´xico or if the acent is first writed M´exico.



What I think the problem is....



Why é á é í ó ú ä ë ï ö ü, why if this acents are displayed well, why the accents of Those type of languages isnt?

Because, like I see in this moment, for example, the acent in á is part of the code and not a code itself that need be joined with the character code that follow/orIsBefore, where in the codification of your(?) language and the others related, the acents are not handled directly like another character but a extra character that can be aplied to normal characters.

Perhaps, without know your language, I see that your accents or diacritical marks, can be writed to any character in your language??



If you still dont understand what the problem is with acents/diacritical marks...

I for write á, do this: press "´" and after "a" = "á" (rendered), but if you see in the source code "á" is not separate like ´a, but have a specific atomic code.

In the case of your language, if Im not wrong, you do near the same..

(with the characters that I have)...

You for write á, do this: press "´" and after "a" = "á" (rendered), but if you see in the source code "á" is separate like ´a, is a composite of two atomic codes.


There is the solution, some one will try to code it??? :P.



A side note, k-meleon, also display the same thing, then the problem is not related much to FF or k-meleon, but to mozilla, I guess :).

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Rifleman]

rea,
It could be a mozilla problem as it shows the same way with all mozilla browsers that I have tested.  It could also be a font issue because they don't use the same default font as IE, I think.  At least it looks that way, the mozilla browsers seem to be using a default font that is carrying more 'weight' than the IE browser.

Paul

[Robert Collins]

Not all websites will work for Firefox because alot of sites are IE specific. Many web sites use ActiveX technology and FF does not have that so those type of sites will only work for IE.

[sba4rmbm]

re:  http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/t/t0101.htm and FFs failure to meet accepted Web standards.

Yes, as I said above, "overstrike diacritical marks" is what breaks the FF:  In Hebrew, one can write a consonant, then a consonant doubler/changer called a dagesh, then a sin-shin sign, then a vowel, and then one (or rarely more) cantillation marks.  Not every letter will have all of these overstrikes, but they can come at any time.

I am frankly in awe of the job that MSIE does in this tricky alignment of overstrikes (and not because I work for MS or have MS stock!), but am deeply disappointed in Mozilla/FF for doing it all wrong.  The same sort of use of rich overstrikes is found in Arabic, Farsi, and even some non-Semite Oriental languages of the Indo-European family (I think); this is over a billion Semite speakers in the World that FF does not support, not to mention the other rich-overstrike language speakers.  I know from personal experience that FF fails with Hebrew and Arabic, and I assume that it does for the rest.

My page may have 31 "Tidy" errors, but it is perfect W3C-validated HTML 4.01 as declared at its top, and all of my pages are verified by "A Real Verifier", a highly recommended shareware.  It is, in my mind, more important to conform to W3C standards than to Tidy's standards.

Well, yes, in Spanish, they are accents; but in our Middle-East langauges they are mostly not connected to accent, but distinguish between stops (p) and fricatives (f), or add a vowel, and the like.  And the set of overstrikes and underlying letter combinations is so vast that having a separate letter as in Spanish is simply unthinkable.

Yes, the OVERLAYS are their own characters in the HTML code, and in the browser's rendering of them each must be placed in the right place for the UNDERLYING letter, which varies in height and width, with risers and hangers in odd places complicating matters.  Some overstrikes are above the letter, some are below, and some must be precisely at the right place inside the letter (in the wrong place, they disappear!).

I agree that the whole Mozilla family has this problem, so far as I know.  The the problems were reported in Bugzilla years ago, and largely ignored.

Another problem with FF/Mozilla is that it uses its own taste in fonts, and not the font specified in the CSS, which makes the Mozilla family not conform to Web standards for CSS in that regard as well as putting the overstrikes in the wrong place.

My pages do not use ActiveX and do not use MSIE tricks, but the plainest sort of vanilla HTML 4.01, with each page verified before upload.

[rea]

Interesting, for what serve that cuantity of diacritital marks? and for what for each single character can have this marks?

Here we only put the diacritical marks for vocals á,é,í,ó,ú and we have another type for mark that the "u" is spelled ü after a "g", tought in the code, that symbol "¨" have code (unicode) for the diferent vocals (I guess other languages) ä, ë,ï,ö,ü.

We use acents for mark a more strong sound and separation of syllables, for mark surprise, and other things, we use symbols around the expression, like "¿Quién esta ahí?", "¡hola!"; "las cosas que no se comparten se pierden" and '2+2=4' for the diferent quotations (tought normally is used only double mark), puntuation and spaces for separate expresions, meanings, paragraphs, like in this message ",", ".", ":", ";", "...", "_" (continuation in the next line of separation of syllabus), "-" (in narration you will see this to much), "(", ")", "*" (for mark in the down will be a reference or annotation), in short that is for what use the symbols apart of the normal "a", "A", "b", "B",..., "z", "Z".

What other things you express with the diacritical marks?, they serve for entonation or for mark questions, surprise adn things like that?, is curiosity.


Rereading, you say they are used mainly for stops (I guess here puntuation symbols?) and fricatives (that is a completely new word for me ;)). But what I read, fricatives are change of the spelling????

And the set of overstrikes and underlying letter combinations is so vast that having a separate letter as in Spanish is simply unthinkable.

That is for what I argee that this symbols can be aplied to any "character" (you call them constants??? or you say constants for the mean that the character dosent change?).

The the problems were reported in Bugzilla years ago, and largely ignored.

I dont see for what this should be complicated :), knowing the source of mozilla if the error is there, the fact is that already the characters are rendered (in this moment dosent matter the place), I guess is because the output is ploting all the characters without check :) if is a "rich overstrikes" language, the solution will be if is a "rich overstrikes" language, have a table/indication that mark what code is a aplicable like diacritical mark and start mergin the symbols.

Is there a "no no" combination of diacritical marks???, tough you can apply any mark to any "constant", there exist  mark that is exclusive with other mark???

the OVERLAYS are their own characters in the HTML code

I guess is in Unicode :).

[Mark Jones]

Well, I guess it's unanimous then, FireFox sucks! Don't use that piece of junk! You'll get more spyware with FF than IE. FF is junk because it is open-source and doesn't put money in someone's pocket. And IE uses less memory. And is the "real" browser. All others must suck. And more people use IE, so the bug patches occur faster...

Curious, how many people can only read Hebrew, as opposed to English? Maybe English should be demoted to a "tertiary language" in favor of Hebrew?

p.s. it is noted as an issue on the mozillazine forums, but not reported as a bug because it seems to affect only certain people: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=235061&highlight=hebrew

[QvasiModo]

Chill, it's just a browser... :toothy

[sba4rmbm]

Semite languages are generally written with consonants only (originally without even spaces between words), and they depend on context and knowledge of typical phrasing to read them.  But for any context when the writer wants to be sure the reader knows exactly what is intended, then the overstrikes do give vowels and distinguish between doubled consonants, and provide punctuation as well.  For example:

s f r:

is it "sefer" book or "sofer" scribe or "safar" he counted or "sefar" border or "sappar" barber?  (There are lots more s f r words!).

The cantllation mark also tells what syllable is accented, to distinguish between, for example, MO-lekh a pagan "god" (noun) and mo-LEKH rules (verb).

While some might think that languages spoken by a small minority of only one billion people are hardly important compared to the all-mighty English, we think that even such a small minority of humanity as one billion people deserves a good browser, and we have one in MSIE.

Those who imagine that FF is not dangerous should read:

http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=160900911

Firefox is a good browser but not the panacea its most ardent fans think it is. While Microsoft's IE gets most of the attention for its security vulnerabilities, the reality is that Firefox (like other open-source products) has security flaws of its own of that readers need to be aware of, Fred Langa notes.

EVERY browser needs to be used carefully, FF included.

[Rifleman]

This is interesting, I got an email from Netscape a couple of hours ago asking me to download Netscape 8.0, it included some interesting information.  It will now allow you to use the IE rendering engine to overcome incompatibilty issues posed by Firefox's rendering engine.  I as surprised to see that in the email.
AOL and Netscape may me moving away from Mozilla

Paul

[Webring]

Well, I guess it's unanimous then, FireFox sucks! Don't use that piece of junk! You'll get more spyware with FF than IE. FF is junk because it is open-source and doesn't put money in someone's pocket. And IE uses less memory. And is the "real" browser. All others must suck. And more people use IE, so the bug patches occur faster...

Curious, how many people can only read Hebrew, as opposed to English? Maybe English should be demoted to a "tertiary language" in favor of Hebrew?

p.s. it is noted as an issue on the mozillazine forums, but not reported as a bug because it seems to affect only certain people: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=235061&highlight=hebrew

You couldn't be more wrong with almost everything you've just said, obviously you didn't read my post before. In any case sorry firefox isn't perfect, it still crushes ie and other browsers in so many ways, and this isn't an opinion, its a fact.

[Webring]

This is interesting, I got an email from Netscape a couple of hours ago asking me to download Netscape 8.0, it included some interesting information.  It will now allow you to use the IE rendering engine to overcome incompatibilty issues posed by Firefox's rendering engine.  I as surprised to see that in the email.
AOL and Netscape may me moving away from Mozilla

Paul

Thats not a very smart move.  Netscape is the company that created one of the worse scripting languages in existance(javascript) and the inronic part is netscape the browser doesn't even fully interpret javascript like other browsers do...go figure. Also netscape is extremely slow, especially new versions with their attempt at "skinning".  They're alot of exploits out that effect netscape and if reverse engineers care enough and start focusing on netscape instead of ie, they're rip it apart. And this can be confirmed by looking at in a debugger for a couple seconds .

[Mark Jones]

Sorry Webring, that was an entirely sarcastic post. I know FF doesn't suck... but people like to oppose people - it's coded into our genes. So, my reasoning was, if I bash FireFox, people would "see the light" and start saying nice things about it again. Some will never see the light, I guess. That's ok. The more browsers we have, the more options we have, and the more possibilities to 'please' everyone.

[DarkWolf]

I have been firefox for awhile and have gotten irritated with IE when I have to go back to using it for a few sites.
Usually IE is slow when loading the forums, firefox has been faster.

But now I'm reading the forums in IE again because I am having login troubles *again*
The first time this happened in fx 106 I emptied the cookies and restarted fx and all was good.
Now when using fx 107 that doesn't work.
I can login fine but when I try to enter a forum it calls me guest again, so I log back in, end up at the first page, enter a forum and I am guest again.
It's been driving me nuts.

Tried emptying caches and cookies, restarted and reinstalled, still can't login right.

[drhowarddrfine]

Did you install the new FF in a new directory?  Sometimes installing FF into the same directory causes problems on some systems.  Or you can just uninstall and then re-install the new one.  I'm on FF and have had no problems.