Missing CSS code selectors

[#1]

@TORPC
Lets get this straight. You are confirming that you have not found any adverse affects from the code you believe is deficient and you want Plusnet to divert effort from introducing badly needed things like the new provisioning and accounts systems to 'fix' things that are not actually causing anyone any issues?

[#2]

You are obviously missing the point
There have been instances where members have reported pages not working as they should, (Ok I only mentioned a couple) yet there were more, just scroll through the boards & you will see for yourself
It appears that you think things like poor code like this

font-size: 1.4rem;

, is acceptable & will just work ?
where the working code should be

font-size: 1.4em;

Does this help you to understand it better ?
If your interested in learning how to code then visit w3schools for a starting point

[#3]

Post a screen shot showing how that affects the display of the website!

[#4]

Why is using rem incorrect?

[#5]

I know nothing about CSS but a quick search shows that font sizing with rem is acceptable (and in many cases preferable):
http://css-tricks.com/font-sizing-with-rem/
http://snook.ca/archives/html_and_css/font-size-with-rem
http://caniuse.com/#feat=rem
Quite why you think your amateur knowledge exceeds those of a team of professional web developers is beyond me...
Perhaps your time would be better spent working on your own 'shop window'?  Compliant it may be but, frankly, it looks awful! 

[#6]

and half the links don't work.
what is it about people in glass houses?

[#7]

It is not only CSS that is causing issue(s) as noted by ejs back in May (I forgot all about the particular thread)
& was going to be flagged to the webteam

Quote from: Linn

I'll flag this up to the Web Team, ejs. Sorry for any inconvenience caused by it.

@pwatson
As you stated

Quote from: pwatson

I know nothing about CSS but a quick search shows that font sizing with rem is acceptable (and in many cases preferable):

Yes I agree but in the right context & order of things
however when it is placed in the wrong context  /  place(s) then errors will get flagged, by the tried & tested / proven checkers (that is one of the many reasons that volunteers tool the time / trouble & with their painstakingly effort to invent the checkers, to be used & as I linked to the main CSS checker that is tried & tested / verified etc & not some hashed up effort, should say a lot tbh
as previously mentioned

Quote from: TORPC

<snip> The trick, however is knowing where & when they need to be used & sites like https://modern.ie/en-us are a useful tool for such a purpose <snip>

Even a simple typo like

tramsition: margin-top .1s linear;

will prevent things from working correctly or the browser having to work harder to attempt to compensate
The browsers have been well known to compensate for bad code

[quote= http://www.thesitewizard.com/webdesign/htmlvalidation.shtml]Why Validate Your HTML and CSS Code?

• There are a number of reasons why you should validate your page.
  It Helps Cross-Browser, Cross-Platform and Future Compatibility
  Although you may be able to create a web page that appears to work on your favourite browser (whatever that may be), your page may contain HTML or CSS errors that do not show up with that browser due to an existing quirk or bug. Another person using a different browser that does not share that particular bug will end up viewing a page that does not show up correctly. It is also possible that later versions of your browser will fix that bug, and your page will be broken when people use its latest incarnation.
  Coding your pages so that it is correct without errors will result in pages that are more likely to work across browsers and platforms (ie, different systems). It is also a form of insurance against future versions of browsers, since all browsers aim towards compliance with the existing HTML and CSS standards.
  


• Search Engine Visibility
  When there are errors in a web page, browsers typically try to compensate in different ways. Some may ignore the broken elements while others make assumptions about what the web designer was trying to achieve. The problem is that when search engines obtain your page and try to parse them for keywords, they will also have to make certain decisions about what to do with the errors. Like browsers, different search engines will probably make different decisions about those errors, resulting in certain parts of your web page (or perhaps even the entire page) not being indexed.
  The safest way to make sure the search engines see the page you want them to see is to present them an error-free page. That way, there is no dispute about which part of your page comprises the content and which the formatting code

.

[#8]

You still haven't posted a screen shot demonstrating how these issues are causing the web pages to be displayed incorrectly!

[#9]

@pwatson
In reference to which site the old or new, also if you are referring to this page http://torfaenpcrepair.com/index-testing-page.html that is because of the linked plusnet.css file as previously mentioned & you have been privy to that link as normal visitors to the site wont see it.
tbh, think yourself lucky to have access to it, as I mostly use it for internal purposes.
I wouldn't mind betting that you find many a website looks / feels awful to you.
FYI it is a work in progress as there are plans to make changes later on & is already pencilled in the calendar
If you think I should consider a revamp, then please be constructive & come up with a viable design / changes that could possibly be considered
Perhaps you could start a thread to support your design in chitchat ?

[#10]

I asked my web developer about this and he couldn't see an issue with 1.4rem - he said it's certainly not poor coding!

[#11]

Had your web developer pulled the source code & fully inspected it, before making that decision ?
At there is a team of experts & a senior developer that is looking after the site
I do not understand how they can miss the most basic of noob type mistakes, even by being checked over by a senior developer

Quote from: Scott

Just to address some of the points in this thread. As a development team we have a set of coding standards that we adhere to this ranges from technical standards to "common sense" standards such as the code should do what it was designed to do. All code is reviewed by a senior developer <snip> At the end of the day, as a development team, we are a bunch of people in a professional occupation and take pride in our work. <snip> We have robust processes and a lot of experienced and professional people looking after the site.

These screenshot(s) only show a small portion of the errors (the majority are the missing browser prefix selectors), as been discussed previously

[#12]

mod:note
Thread now locked as this is going nowhere.
TORPC - PN have responded in some detail to your initial comments and it's now time you dropped it.
I'm the rest of you have got better things to be doing on Sunday night..