Text typed in a particular website search bar does not show

[Weezecat]

When I type text in the search bar of the website https://www.petsathome.com/ nothing shows except a half-height cursor moving along as the typing progresses. This does not happen with Microsoft Edge, Firefox or Chrome where the text typed into the website's search bar shows as it should. This happens with Palemoon version 28.7 using OS Windows 7 on my desktop and also Windows 10 on my laptop.

Please would somebody check this by connecting to this website with Palemoon and see if it can be repeated. One of my friends has also tried the search on this site with the same result as me. The strange this is, that pressing the search button on the bar will search for what has been typed but not actually showing.

I feel that this must be peculiar to Palemoon as it does not occur with any other browser. Older versions of Palemoon always used to display the typed search text, and a much older version I which have installed on a Windows XP machine still works properly and shows the text typed on the site's search bar.

[therube]

Confirmed.

Does not appear to be useragent related.

[Moonchild]

It seems to be a site design issue.
The input field is set with css "height:0", but then forced with padding to a specific height, restricting it with a max-height overall, resulting in a 2.5rem high bar that is completely filled with padding space.
Padding by definition can't have content so there is no room for the searched text to be displayed (and it shouldn't be according to the CSS rules, AFAICT).
I'm surprised that other browsers do display the search text. I'm pretty sure they should not.

[Moonchild]

Simple fix for the webmasters:

Remove "height:0" and set top/bottom padding to 0, and it displays perfectly.

[Weezecat]

Been in touch with Pets at Home and the response was that their web page is optimized for Chrome as this is the most widely used browser, so they say! Thanks for your reply and explanation, and I will continue to use Pale Moon.

[vannilla]

Been in touch with Pets at Home and the response was that their web page is optimized for Chrome as this is the most widely used browser, so they say! Thanks for your reply and explanation, and I will continue to use Pale Moon.

Interesting...
So it seems that Chrome subtly accepts technically wrong definitions.
Then a browser appears that correctly notices that those definitions are wrong, but since Chrome works fine then the problem is in the other browser.
What a devilish plan!

[adesh]

Chrome is too liberal in accepting programming/design mistakes, thus promotes bad design and creates more dumb web developers.

[Moonchild]

their web page is optimized for Chrome as this is the most widely used browser

It's not an optimization. It's a design flaw that Chrome accepts and we do not.

[Weezecat]

If that's the case, why does Firefox, MS Edge, and Opera as well as Chrome, all load the page with the ability to view the entered text in the website's search bar? Have you tried it with all these browsers and see for yourself that they all work as expected?

[New Tobin Paradigm]

Perhaps because they are all actually Chrome except Firefox which today tends to match Chrome's acceptance of flawed behavior without question. Original Edge's whole point was to compete by also matching but gave up and is being replaced by actual Chrome.

Was that actually a serious question? Open your eyes and realize there is little diversity left...

Literally Chrome: Chrome, New Edge, Opera, Brave, Vivaldi, and almost certainly every other browser that started in the past 8 years

Pretending to be or trying to match Chrome in everything: Firefox and rebuilds (including Waterfox), Original Edge, Non-Blink Webkit/khtml (including Safari and Konqueror)

And then there is lil ol' us: Pale Moon, Basilisk, Borealis, Hyperbola's offerings

What a world we live in.. Chrome, Pseudo-Chrome, and Us.

As far as standards go: We, of course have little to no voice. So the Standards go basically like this.

Chrome does a thing. Pseudo-Chrome matches it. Defacto Standard. OR.. Chrome proposes a thing. Pseudo-Chrome agrees. Written Standard.

Oh best not forget.. Chrome doesn't or won't implement an established written standard as it is written. Pseudo-Chrome matches it and if anyone can be bothered the standard is updated to match Chrome.

Then there are the Living Standards which change month to month.

Welcome to the Open Web Platform.

[RJARRRPCGP]

Off-topic:
So we're going to be discriminated like how the pre-Chrome Opera was.

[New Tobin Paradigm]

Worse.. We are the scum of the earth.. The longer we hang in there, the more we accomplish the worse it will get. I been trying to tell you all this for years. No one listens.

But what is the alternative? Stand in line for the brain chips and complete our assimilation like good little drones? I think not.

[moonbat]

It's IE6 all over again. Except that IE6 flouted standards while Google is defining them as a rolling target.

[Moonchild]

It's IE6 all over again. Except that IE6 flouted standards while Google is defining them as a rolling target.

That's a really, really bad comparison.

[moonbat]

Not saying both browsers are alike or equally bad - only with reference to making everyone dance to their tune - one by breaking standards, the other by making them a moving target and adding features first that may or may not become officially defined. Pale Moon gets the blame for not supporting something that they've added experimentally but was immediately taken up by various websites.

[Goodydino]

Is it that hard to validate web page code with W3C so that any browser can render it?

[moonbat]

Is it that hard to validate web page code with W3C so that any browser can render it?

These websites choose to optimize for Chrome because of its larger userbase. They don't really care about W3C as long as their regular visitors are happy.

[Cassette]

What makes this site's design choice so frustrating is how senseless it is. If you make the changes that Moonchild suggested, it still works perfectly fine in Firefox. The only trade off is additional compatibility with other browsers which means more customers can use the site with the browser of their choice. When they say that the site is "optimized for Chrome" what they mean is, "we tested it in Chrome and it works". Are we to believe that this method is faster in Chrome? I very much doubt that.

[moonbat]

When they say that the site is "optimized for Chrome" what they mean is, "we tested it in Chrome and it works".

What they mean is 'we don't give a crap about any other browsers as long as it renders in Chrome, standards be damned."

[adesh]

What they mean is 'we don't give a crap about any other browsers as long as it renders in Chrome, standards be damned."

Off-topic:
Yes, that's a more accurate description of the situation.