Domain name

You seem to be using the old domain name www.imf.au.dk.

While this name will keep working for a long period, I recommend that you change to www.imf.au.dk, for instance by following this link:
http://www.imf.au.dk/~jeppesn/

Great! You seem to be using the new domain name www.imf.au.dk.

Back to Jeppe's homepages.

Your browser does not use the variable $HOST to tell its name for this server. You should check that the name is www.imf.au.dk like in this link:
http://www.imf.au.dk/~jeppesn/

The name or IP number, , that you use for this server, is different from the canonical name www.imf.au.dk which you might want to use.
http://www.imf.au.dk/~jeppesn/

You can see the unparsed source code of this document.

Some handy information:

Flg. er taget fra: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2068/rfc2068
---------------------------------------------------------------

  10.1.1 100 Continue ....................................54
     10.1.2 101 Switching Protocols .........................54
    10.2 Successful 2xx .....................................54
     10.2.1 200 OK ..........................................54
     10.2.2 201 Created .....................................55
     10.2.3 202 Accepted ....................................55
     10.2.4 203 Non-Authoritative Information ...............55
     10.2.5 204 No Content ..................................55
     10.2.6 205 Reset Content ...............................56
     10.2.7 206 Partial Content .............................56
    10.3 Redirection 3xx ....................................56
     10.3.1 300 Multiple Choices ............................57
     10.3.2 301 Moved Permanently ...........................57
     10.3.3 302 Moved Temporarily ...........................58
     10.3.4 303 See Other ...................................58
     10.3.5 304 Not Modified ................................58
     10.3.6 305 Use Proxy ...................................59
    10.4 Client Error 4xx ...................................59
     10.4.1 400 Bad Request .................................60
     10.4.2 401 Unauthorized ................................60
     10.4.3 402 Payment Required ............................60
     10.4.4 403 Forbidden ...................................60
     10.4.5 404 Not Found ...................................60
     10.4.6 405 Method Not Allowed ..........................61
     10.4.7 406 Not Acceptable ..............................61
     10.4.8 407 Proxy Authentication Required ...............61
     10.4.9 408 Request Timeout .............................62
     10.4.10 409 Conflict ...................................62
     10.4.11 410 Gone .......................................62
     10.4.12 411 Length Required ............................63
     10.4.13 412 Precondition Failed ........................63
     10.4.14 413 Request Entity Too Large ...................63
     10.4.15 414 Request-URI Too Long .......................63
     10.4.16 415 Unsupported Media Type .....................63
    10.5 Server Error 5xx ...................................64
     10.5.1 500 Internal Server Error .......................64
     10.5.2 501 Not Implemented .............................64

-----------------------------------------------------------------

From comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets Mon Aug 10 17:47:08 1998
From: "John A. Grant" 
Newsgroups: comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
Subject: Netscape & Microsoft bug for CSS 'clip'
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1998 20:43:11 -0400
Organization: Natural Resources Canada / Ressources naturelles Canada
Lines: 190
Message-ID: <6qlftu$kef15@nrn2.NRCan.gc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jag.gsc.nrcan.gc.ca
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3115.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Path: news.daimi.aau.dk!news.net.uni-c.dk!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news99.sunet.se!news-peer-europe.sprintlink.net!Sprint!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer-east.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!torn!webster.srv.gc.ca!news.NRCan.gc.ca!not-for-mail
Xref: news.daimi.aau.dk comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:5809

I apologize for the length of this, but I thought people might
be interested in this.

I have submitted the attached bug report to both Netscape
& Microsoft.  Later I discovered that the original draft spec
specified the (top,left) corner and that's what current browsers
are using, but the spec has changed since them.  So I submitted
a followup post to both companies (it appears after the initial
report below). Shortly after, I got the following reply from Ian
Jacobs at W3C:

    "About 'clip': I talked to someone at Microsoft who
    acknowledged that the behavior you describe will be
    changed in some upcoming version of the browser
    to comply with the CSS2 Recommendation. He
    didn't specify what upcoming version, however. I
    did not talk to anyone at Netscape about this"

This concerns the 'clip' property in CSS. The documentation at:
 http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visufx.html

states clearly that:
 "In CSS2, the only valid  value is:
 rect (   ) where
 ,  , and  specify
 offsets from the respective sides of the box"

I went to the Netscape test suite at:
 http://developer.netscape.com/docs/technote/dynhtml/csspapi/tests.html

and selected:
 http://developer.netscape.com/docs/technote/dynhtml/csspapi/testclip.html

I viewed this page with both Microsoft Internet Explorer
and Netscape Communicator 4 and they both indicate 100%
success and they both show identical pictures. Both
browsers are (incorrectly?) interpreting the  &
 parameters as being measured from the LEFT &
TOP edges of the container respectively despite the fact
that the W3C documentation states that they are to be
measured from the RIGHT and BOTTOM edges of the container.

According to the documentation, the following:
 clip: rect(0,0,0,0);

should represent 'no clipping' and the entire container
should be visible. But if
 clip: rect(0,0,0,0);

is used with either of these 2 browsers, the picture is
entirely clipped and is not visible. So either the
documentation is wrong or both browser implementations
are wrong.

I have contacted the W3C editors (specifically Ian Jacobs,
ij@w3.org) several times to discuss this point (copies of
e-mail correspondnce available on request) and each time
Ian has emphatically stated that the documentation is correct.
Therefore both Netscape Communicator and Microsoft Internet
Explorer are interpreting it incorrectly.

Attached is my own test page that uses static CSS settings
to illustrate the problem, thereby completely eliminating
the DOM and scripting differences. Read the HTML source to
understand what you are seeing and what you should be seeing.

If I am correct and this is incorrectly implemented, lots of
of existing code will break if the implementation is changed
now.

{clip: rect(0,0,0,0);}
You won't see this text, but you should see it all, because the clip rectangle is 0 pixels inside of all 4 edges of the container. You'll see it if you change the clip property for 'text1' above and redisplay this file. {clip: rect(0,300,300,0);}
You will see all of this text, but you should NOT see any of it at all, since the right & bottom edges of the clipping rectangle are 300 pixels inside of the right & bottom edges of the container. {clip: rect(0,40,40,0);}
This text should be clipped 40 pixels inside of the right & bottom edges of the container, but instead it is clipped 40 pixels from the left & top edge of the container.