Why put scripts in your email?  This pops up two blank windows when I read 
it....annoying at best dude.

Ray

At 11:59 AM 12/21/2004, you wrote:
>Ben Rogers wrote:
>
>  >>Well, your problems are manyfold.
>  >>
>  >>Firstly, you're depending on behaviour that was never mandated in the
>  >>specs, that being that a height of 100% means 100% of the available
>  >>window area or available area.
>  >
>  > I don't think he's "depending" on this behavior. He's lamenting the fact
>  > that CSS doesn't support a mechanism for sizing elements relative to the
>  > available space. In HTML all heights and widths are based on the
>available
>  > area, not the size of the containing block.
>
>What I meant by depending is that while such behaviour isn't specified
>in the spec, it is available in a fair few browsers in their quirks
>mode, but not in their standards mode.
>
>And thanks for the article below: I didn't know about the 100% height on
>the html element trick.
>
>  > I also think he's hoping that someone will prove him wrong. :)
>
>Well, I was trying to show that he was trying to put in a screw with a
>hammer rather than a screwdriver: it might kinda work, but it's not the
>right way, seeing as his problem was really a positioning one rather
>than
>
> >>If IE wasn't so braindead, it'd support fixed positioning. In this case,
> >>you could position your elements wherever you liked relative to the four
> >>sides of the screen. This is possible in Firefox, but not in IE, because
> >>MS have slowly let IE die.
> >
> > Fixed positioning is possible in Internet Explorer. It is even possible in
> > versions of Internet Explorer which pre-date the Mozilla project. Again,
> > this is not about positioning, it's about sizing elements.
>
>But what he's trying to do *is* positioning, not sizing. I know he's
>talking about sizing, but what I'm trying to get across is that *his*
>particular problem isn't with sizing, and not with the differences
>between the MS and W3C box models.
>
>And IE doesn't support fixed positioning, nor has it ever done so. Try
>the code below in IE6, Firefox, Opera, and any other browsers you can
>lay your hands on if you don't believe me.
>
> > Also, Microsoft has not let Internet Explorer die. They are going to tie
> > Internet Explorer upgrades to new releases of the operating system.
> > Personally, I wish they hadn't made this decision, but that's their
> > currently announced intention.
>
>And there only doing that because another strong contender appeared on
>the scene in their primary market. They *had* let it die, but now
>they're resurrecting it.
>
> > However, none of the solutions mentioned in these articles completely 
> solves
> > Isaac's problem. In fact, Isaac only got as far as he did because he mixed
> > html table tags with divs.
>
>And my argument is that he's attacking the problem with the wrong tools.
>Positioning is what he want. It's a pity IE just doesn't support it
>completely enough.
>
>Mind you, there's a set of JavaScript hacks called IE7, which you've
>probably heard of, that fixes a lot of these flaws in IE6.
>
> > However, I was unable to eliminate the vertical scroll bar. I'm not even
> > quite sure where this is coming from. My guess is it's the window chrome.
>
>Yup, it's part of the chrome. That, and the padding at the bottom of the
>outermost div is going to trigger it anyway.
>
>Here's that code:
>
><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
>         "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>
>Padding!
>I'm here because of fixed positioning!
>
>Using fixed positioning, his problem can be solved as follows:
>
><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
>         "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
>
>onTap Framework
>Home
><http://affiliates.macromedia.com/b.asp?id=2549&p=go/dr_home_aff1>
>[]
>
>
>Hence, my point.
>
>--
>Keith Gaughan, Developer
>Digital Crew Ltd., Pembroke House, Pembroke Street, Cork, Ireland
>http://digital-crew.com/
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.2 - Release Date: 20/12/2004
>
>
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net
http://www.cfhosting.net

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:188392
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to