Virgin please go back to skool.............

[rickylee]

Thought this was a frequent flyer forum, not a spelling quest. Does the spelling/ format affect the ability to book a seat, make the plane late or less safe????

Professionalism is a quality of service.

 

[MarkD]

How is it unprofessional on their behalf, its a browser issue

 

[AdMEL]

How is it unprofessional on their behalf, its a browser issue

How do you know it's a browser issue and not just VA IT sloppy coding? Given I have never seen this issue on any other webpage viewed on Safari, I would argue it's more likely sloppy coding. I'm not an IT expert though.

 

[MarkD]

No it expert here either, but read up thread a bit and the experts have discussed it

 

[Ausbt]

amateurish presentation?:evil:

What are you talking about? There is seriously nothing wrong with that. I'd recommend you use a decent browser like Firefox (...unless of course you are offended by the recent comments by Mozilla's CEO - which would be a reasonable position to take). If you are reading it on a so-called 'smart phone' - bah! Phones are for talking.

 

[AdMEL]

No it expert here either, but read up thread a bit and the experts have discussed it

I have re- read all of the comments (which I was part of) and whilst it has been discussed, I don't see anything definitive, but more comments suggest Virgin sloppy coding to me!

 

[medhead]

Like QF have never sent an email riddled with errors...

Like Qf haven't had to make multiple changes and even withdrawn info completely to things like "Changes to the way we earn". Personally a missing 'f' or two when the meaning can still be understood is nothing compared to completely misleading information.

 

[woodborer]

I have re- read all of the comments (which I was part of) and whilst it has been discussed, I don't see anything definitive, but more comments suggest Virgin sloppy coding to me!

Sloppy coding, yes, but by Virgin - I don't think so. It is just a lump of text. Basically, it looks like a ligature substitution problem. In essence, the browser is trying to replace the 'ff' with a single glyph representing two f characters, rather than placing two character 'f' next to each other. It is more pleasing on the eye that way. The problem seems to be with some combination of the font Virgin have used, together with some Apple based products not supporting it. The only thing Virgin could really have done, perhaps, is to give the browser an instruction not to attempt to perform ligature substitution.

 

[straitman]

What is really sloppy here is that I noticed this last year sometime when the pages were first produced.

I advised VA via people I know in the system so it should have been fixed by now.

 

[calroth]

Sloppy coding, yes, but by Virgin - I don't think so. It is just a lump of text. Basically, it looks like a ligature substitution problem. In essence, the browser is trying to replace the 'ff' with a single glyph representing two f characters, rather than placing two character 'f' next to each other. It is more pleasing on the eye that way. The problem seems to be with some combination of the font Virgin have used, together with some Apple based products not supporting it. The only thing Virgin could really have done, perhaps, is to give the browser an instruction not to attempt to perform ligature substitution.

Just had a peek at the source. The fonts seem to be DroidSans, or Arial, or sans-serif; in that order preference. Maybe it's a bug with Safari's ligatures in DroidSans?

offer Offer OFFER flight Flight FLIGHT

Edit: not sure if the forum software picked that up right, but it's supposed to be DroidSans.

 

[heycam]

I think woodborer/calroth are on the money with the use of DroidSans. The DroidSans font they have set up as a downloadable font doesn't even have fi, fl, etc. ligatures in it, so I'm guessing that's a Safari/WebKit bug that it tries to choose a ligature glyph for those characters. Another source of difference between Firefox and Safari is that they have not set up their servers correctly to serve the downloadable fonts in a way that Firefox likes; Safari is more lax about this. So the font doesn't get used at all in Firefox. That the font isn't used at all on Firefox seems like something they would have found with cursory testing of their website.

Cameron
(Firefox developer)

 

[Sprucegoose]

I believe this has been an issue since they first announced the program: View it on Desktop and/or a particular browser and you see it all fine, view it on a smartphone and it comes up with all the errors. I remember noticing it myself when I first was reading about the new program.

I'll try and reproduce the different views/one with mistakes and one without to get my point across. Me thinks the question should be, if this be the case, is how and why are we getting two different content's across different ways to viewing in essence what should be the same thing.... Right?

Yes if you are correct then why is it happening and allowed to reflect against a companies presentation.

In short if others can prevent this why can't they??

 

[Sprucegoose]

What are you talking about? There is seriously nothing wrong with that. I'd recommend you use a decent browser like Firefox (...unless of course you are offended by the recent comments by Mozilla's CEO - which would be a reasonable position to take). If you are reading it on a so-called 'smart phone' - bah! Phones are for talking.

No I disagree.

I first read it on a Mac, a fairly popular device and not on a iPhone. But I should be able to read it on an iPhone in any case and it should be presented correctly.