[Mike Smith]

I did

background:url(pathtoimage) center bottom no-repeat;

in a content div as a test here now, and it works fine in IE8, FF and Chrome ….

[Mike Smith]

It does look different here in IE, Chrome and FF, though background position is not the only issue. They also handle the horizontal positioning / repeating a little differently.

You have 169 css errors liated by the validator this morning …. or 148 if you are aiming at css3.

Inconsistent treatment by browsers of non-compliant code is not unexpected. Cleaning up your css would be a good place to start!

https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fhrnewseastanglia.com%2F&profile=css3&usermedium=all&warning=1&lang=en

https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css21&warning=0&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fhrnewseastanglia.com%2F

[Mike Smith]

You could look at this if you like. https://videojs.com/

[Mike Smith]

This might help https://www.knowflash.com/content/view/104/27/ or
https://www.codingcolor.com/as3/how-do-you-load-an-image-into-an-empty-movieclip-in-as-3-0/

[Mike Smith]

Entertaining. IE6, perhaps sadly, still has a significant market share. https://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/07/internet-explorer-gains-market-share-so-does-ie6.ars

Dara from Net Applications rates it as high as 17% in June this year (though of course accurate and representative usage data are hard to come by, and results var by method and sample sites used)
https://techcrunch.com/2010/02/02/internet-explorer-browser-share/ PC Mag has it down at 5% globally, though still very widelyused in China nd India https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2368557,00.asp

Many businesses reportedly retain it. https://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/042610-ie6-corporate-users.html

[Mike Smith]

To follow up on this, currently your demo home page is failing css 3 validation at w3c https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwemgroup.com%2Ftemplate-home.htm&profile=css3&usermedium=all&warning=1&lang=en , though it is claiming otherwise.

css3 like html is an unfinished spec, and you can expect cross browser implementation issues, so graceful fallback might be a good strategy !
https://www.css3.info/vendor-specific-extensions-to-css3/
https://www.css3.info/the-big-css3-validation-debate/

[Mike Smith]

Nice overall look.

You’re aware though that HTML is not a stable specification, may change a lot yet, and that support is patchy and potentially inconsistent in current browsers, and not available in older browsers, of which there are many in the wild.

Specifics on your pages:
The fixed header and footer give quite an interesting,retro, frames-style feel, but on two monitors here they use up quite a lot of screen real estate, reducing the core content area to not much, unless viewed full screen. They feel oversized.

It seems, too, that you are using fixed font sizes, in pixels. Perhaps you are not aware that this is regarded as not good practice, for accessibility and user control reasons, and might cause your site to fail an accessibility audit?

https://css-discuss.incutio.com/wiki/Force_Font_Size
https://www.denvergov.org/accessibility/techniques_fonts.asp
https://www.useit.com/alertbox/9605.html

It seems you might be designing on a screen with a 72dpi virtual font resolution a Mac, whereas many are on screens with text at a virtual 96dpi Windows and Linux. The result is that the text looks really quite small on Windows here – is that how you intended it?

https://www.scantips.com/no72dpi.html#3
https://www.scantips.com/no72dpib.html

I appreciate that when asking for feedback sometimes anything less than unequivocal praise can be unwelcome or hurtful, and if this has fallen that way with you then I apologise. It is intended to behelpful in improving what already looks like it’s going to be good work .

[Mike Smith]

Credit control remains an issue with a known client, when you move up to a more expensive project. You might want to explore a regular weekly, fortnightly or monthly billing arrangement, with an agreed payment period, and an up-front deposit, to control your risk in non-payment.

[Mike Smith]

Different browsers can interpret html / xhtml a little differently, and the worldwide web consortium https://www.w3.org agrees “standards” – sets of rules governing what can be used in html / css, and how browsers should interpret these.

If your website complies strictly with these standards, this will minimise cross-browser differences – browsers don’t all interpret compliant sites identically, but once code is non-compliant the browser writers face the task of interpreting what they think the site might have intended – and the differences get much bigger.

w3c has helpful compliance testers at https://validator.w3.org/ for html and https://validator.w3.org/ for css. If you run your site through, you will find lots of errors reported, along with a little explanation of each error. The more of those you can fix, probably the better. One big difference with some Microsoft browsers is that they may interpret padding and margin differently when the site is compliant (is “standards mode”) or non compliant (in “quirks mode”).

One specific thought: you are using tables for laying out your navigation area, when you might be using divs. Padding / margin differences in quirks mode can become very visible with tables, because of the large number of cells each with padding and margin …

[Mike Smith]

Talent

Dedication

Humility

Willingness and ability to learn

Realism