The ALPO Jupiter newsletter (see URL) is not readable with mozilla -- the lines don't wrap. It looks fine in 4.7. I've taken the file (ugly html with lots of redundancies, which claims to have been generated with MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000) and pared it down to the smallest case I could find which caused the problem (will attach). Basically, it has a <B><I> which is closed with </B></I> (note the incorrect nesting), and following that is a <pre>, and somehow the confusion over the incorrect nesting combines with the pre (which is itself correctly closed) so that all subsequent text ends up inside the pre tag (which then is given a new, incorrect i tag inside it) and is not wrapped at all. If the pre is removed, however, the subsequent text is correctly wrapped. It's the combination of the incorrectly nested inline tags followed by the pre which is causing the bad document format.

Note, the original URL has been fixed by the owner, so use the attached sample to see the problem.

Akkana : anything like bug 26347?

*** Bug 63581 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

This is probably related to bug 26347, but goes beyond of it. Testcases from bug 63581: <P><B>text</P>...: http://clarence.de/metager-test/testcase.html (problem) <P><B>text...: http://clarence.de/metager-test/testcase-2.html (ok) <P><B>text</B></P>...: http://clarence.de/metager-test/testcase-3.html (ok) [...=<PRE>text</PRE><P>text] 2000-12-21-05, trunk, Win NT OS should be "all"; summary should contain the problem with <PRE>.

It seems like invalid markup! Should Mozilla/Netscape render all HTML documents with markup errors, or should we ask the author to correct this typo? But if Mozilla should render this kind of markup errors, where will this end? You can make a zillion testcases where browsers in general don't render it at all, but why should you?

It's certainly invalid markup, but if lots of web sites make this mistake, then given a choice between a browser which renders such pages fairly well, and one that doesn't, which would most users choose?

It seem to work now!!!

But, of course, there are other problems.

Marking WFM.

updated qa contact.

Verified on build: 2001-05-07-06-Trunk platform: WinNT