Mac users can't view Frontpage site

What is the URL so some mac users can try to visit it and see if they have same problem.

-Greg

Most likely all you have to do is validate your code. Check which browsers on the Mac are causing problems, it's unlikely the Mac itself.

http://validator.w3.org/

My url is herkomission.org.

You should see a navbar at the top of the page.
There is a tropical landscape to the left and revolving pictures to the right.
There also should be three phrases at the bottom of these pictures.

I was told that in some places in the site- the text is on top of each other. Pretty messed up.

I have only accessed the site on pc's- no trouble. Just a couple quirks- but I can fix them.

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.herkomission.org%2FTuesday.htm&charset=iso-8859-1+%28Western+Europe%29&doctype=HTML+4.01+Transitional

It breaks my heart to see what crap FrontPage puts out. Seriously, you would be far better to learn the basics for a site like this than to have to undo the damage that FP does.

To make it worse, you've chosen to use a dynamic menu that doesn't work cross-browser, and is a massive load of code. Don't start complicated. Start simple and build. It's a lesson that applies across the board that when you start complicated, you create messes that fail to teach you how to make successes (which is the real failure!)

Safari: no navigation, images are in the right place
IE 5.2/Mac: navigation, images are overlapping at the bottom (text images upon text images) and the big photos are shoved down a bit and the menu is very touchy and hard to trigger the actions
FireFox: same as Safari (and all other Mozilla browsers are as well).

You are using images for your textual information, which will result in a mess, regardless, plus it makes the information inaccessible and annoying and actually fairly ugly as well, which I would imagine is the opposite reasoning for having it in an image!

Re: validating your code

When you are creating websites that have to work in multiple situations, the safest initial method of ensuring the sites will work is to:

1. Use standard markup (nothing proprietary to one browser or another)
2. Avoid the use of heavy DHTML menu systems that don't degrade to text links
3. Start simple and get the message across with text. Add images and design as you learn more about how to do it.

Validating is like spell-checking for code. It makes sure you have all the parts in the right place, and that all the parts are the right parts. It doesn't ensure that your page will work, but it goes a VERY VERY LONG WAY towards ensuring that! It also helps you learn the language better, and gives you more proficiency through that knowledge.

Quote: It breaks my heart to see what crap FrontPage puts out. Seriously, you would be far better to learn the basics for a site like this than to have to undo the damage that FP does.

I'll second that! I tell everyone to learn to do it by hand first, get a text editor, beyond that, I recommend Dreamweaver.

-Greg

lol, yes, the learning curve can be a doozy when you're starting from scratch.

1. Don't make text into images, use text (as much as possible)
2. If you need to make text into images, they should be .gif or .png
3. Photos should be .jpg or .png only (never .gif) and check your quality -- visible compression and artifacting is the hallmark of the amateur and easily avoided
4. Don't use DHTML menus! Okay, sometimes they are useful, but usually they aren't. Most of the time they cause problems in getting the site to work everywhere, and can easily lose and frustrate users. Sensible site architecture means sections in your case.

Dreamweaver is a great application, but has its own steep learning curve. If you're going to keep doing this, you'll need to improve your quality of images significantly. A solid graphics editor would be more valuable than a development application if you have to choose -- you can hand code a site, but you can't hand code an image (well, it is so problematic as to be unreasonable to do).

See this excellent reference for ideas on navigation that don't involve huge amounts of JavaScript and that do degrade well in older or incapable browsers: http://css.maxdesign.com.au/listamatic/

Text, text, text. It's the most valuable and fastest way of communicating, don't hide it in image files.

ezhtml.net (Busy's site, he is a moderator here) may be of use.

PaintShopPro can do a better job than that -- by losing the dynamic menu, you'll have more "space" for the images in terms of file size and you won't need to compress them so much.

Realistically, you can build a site with Notepad and PaintShopPro that looks as good as Dreamweaver + Fireworks or Photoshop. Really! You don't need high-end systems. They do help in many many ways when you're working on heavy sites or need to work in the industry standard, but if you're optimizing photographs, most bitmap graphics applications do comparable jobs of the task.

Thank you for your help!