Following on from my last post where I told you all, yes it was a very interesting post, about my hassle with the table tag, yeaterday I spent what seemed like a couple of hours with another coding problem.

I am doing the html interface for a CD ROM for work, eg I can do it cheaper than the firm who were doing it and as it is simply changing links and adding a few new ones it seemed like an easy job. However when I got into the code I realised I need to add a couple of sections based on what had been coped before. But could I find out which piece of code needed copying? Yep, same answer as the HTML Hell post. To make matters worse the issue is again to do with tables. I mean how difficult can it be to find the beginning of a section, copy it and then rename the text within? So perhaps a late night tonight and I may even revert to using my trusted Hot Dog 7.03 html editor to help me understand the structure.

The Times reviews didn’t hold anything worthy of a comment this weekend, but I did manage to catch Match of the Day – both 1 and 2. This does deserve a comment. I thought the aim of this program was to show football, however it seems that they are now trying to turn it into a seeding ground for untapped stand up comedy. It is like Saint and Greavsie without the aforementioned presenters, but equally unfunny. Dear BBC, please leave the football comedy to Fantasy Football.

Aaaargh. Ok I’m trying to set up a site with a table based layout and the firfox vs IE hassle has once again surfaced. I have it perfect in firefox but can I get it to layout right in IE? Can I ****! And can I understand what the problem is? Same answer!

I thought if you specified a table cell width it would stick to it, and in firefox it does, but in IE it doesn’t. Happily the tea isn’t going cold as I’m supping some stella but that isn’t the issue. (And no I’m not so tipsy I’ve done some obscure piece of coding – the coding I did was a few days ago).

But what is the solution? Well I’ll go and have a look and see if I can sort it. But at the same time I’m using the 2nd pc in the house and the monitor is playing up – although not sure if it is the monitor or the graphics card – it keeps flicking from normal size to a reduced size and it is annoying me.

It must be the day for quoting The Times (I’m so livid I was almost tempted to put the ‘t’ in The as lower case in complaint). In an article talking about Harry Hill creating a TV programme for children the author, (who isn’t named on the online version – scared eh? You should be!) talks about their dislike of slapstick comedy. Ok slapstick isn’t to everyones taste and each to their own, I accept that. But when it comes to the following sentence that is a step too far. After a brief journey through comedy history, listing slapstick people who they find unfunny, they then state the following:

Their contemporary equivalents are the Chuckle Brothers who manage to be both
unfunny and decidedly sinister — and not in a good way

How could they diss the comedy gods of children’s TV! I may well have to write to Barry and Paul in a fit of outrage to demand that they sue for libel and then console them! How could the author say that they are sinister? What could be sinister about two middle-aged guys with northern accents, short hair, moustaches and who always hang around together?

The rest of the article is here