Pages from Weddings.com do not display well in Safari, but they do in IE and FF. Example: "http://kokesandscholten.weddings.com/".
There is also one repeated JavaScript error that happens while the page is open (every few seconds): TypeError: Null value http://registry.weddingchannel.com/wedding_websites/PersonalWebsite.action?view=home&occ=544574740 Line: 199
Created attachment 17994 [details] Absolute positioned element inside relative positioned element with display:table causes potential bug
An element with position:absolute inside an element with position:relative and display:table causes the first element to be positioned relative to the parentelement. The same behaviour is shown in Webkit and IE6. Firefox positions the element relative to the page. This causes a problem on the wedding-site, as IE (and thus Safari) specific CSS, is done using !important, e.g: .square { top:200px; !important top:400px; } Webkit will respect the first "top", IE the second. This results in a correct page for IE and Firefox, but not Safari. --- The javascript error is just an interval continuing to refer to a nonexistent element.
Not sure this reduction is valid. Our rendering of that reduction is completely correct.
The rendering of the reduction (http://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=17994&action=view) is different between the current nightly on 10.4.11 and Firefox 2.0.11. On Firefox, the blue square is in the middle of the red square. It most definitely is not when using r28848 on 10.4.11, with the blue square rendering below the red square.
The blue box says: "Should be in the middle of the red square". This may very well be incorrect, and IE and Webkit may be right, and the bug is with Firefox. I should have noted that. (In reply to comment #4) > Not sure this reduction is valid. Our rendering of that reduction is > completely correct. >
So do we need another reduction, or is this an evangelism issue for weddings.com?
If Dave Hyatt is correct (and I'm assuming he is:)), I would say this is an evangelism issue. The problem is however, that this would require specific Safari alterations for the wedding-site. As Webkit handles both !important and the positioning issue correctly, it falls between IE and Firefox, as IE handles !important incorrectly, and Firefox handles the positioning issue incorrectly. If Firefox is in the wrong, it seems to be a pretty major bug? In any case, the reduction is correct: This is why the wedding-page doesn't work in Safari. (In reply to comment #7) > So do we need another reduction, or is this an evangelism issue for > weddings.com? >
I sent a note about correcting the web site for Safari 3 (WebKit) to the "Contact Us" link at the bottom of this web page to start the ball rolling: http://www.weddingchannel.com/ui/buildArticle.action?assetUID=42591
Response from customer support: From: "Wedding Channel" <customerservice@weddingchannel.com> To: ddkilzer@webkit.org Subject: RE: Other / General Comments (Thread:1417376) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 10:19:09 -0800 Thank You For Your Recent WeddingChannel Inquiry Dear David, WeddingChannel.com does have a few known compatibility issues with the Safari browser. Several Mac users I've spoken to say the Firefox browser works better for them when Safari won't. Other than that, you might try deleting your cookies and trying again, or making the attempt from a different computer. If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact customer service at the phone number or email address below. Thank you and have a Great day! Sincerely, Brian WeddingChannel Customer Service Team customerservice@weddingchannel.com
Created attachment 461401 [details] Safari 15.6 matches with other browsers I am unable to reproduce this issue with Safari 15.6 on macOS 12.5 based on attached reduction test case and Safari matches with all other browsers as can be seen and now Firefox has changed their behavior to aligned with Webkit by not showing "Blue" box inside. Since it was a fix outside of Webkit / Safari, I am going to mark this as 'RESOLVED INVALID'. Please reopen, if needed. Thanks!