S.Isaac Dealey wrote: >>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. > > I dunno -- I was giving him the benefit of the doubt, 'cause I was > hoping he would prove me wrong. :P The issue of positioning is related > to it, but only really occurs because of the desire for sizing.
Your issue's purely one of positioning. That's why I was saying what I was. Sizing issues just don't come into your problem. >>>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. > > I thought IE supported fixed positioning... I was giving him the > benefit of the doubt that there was something wrong with MS > implementation of it and his email was merely worded in a confusing > manner. It doesn't support fixed positioning. Full stop. End of story. Elvis may even have left the building. It supports relative and absolute, but not fixed. You need JavaScript hacks to support it. <rant> Where did this myth come from, anyway? At best it sounds like a confusion between what fixed and absolute positioning do. Fixed positioning positions things relative to the viewport. Absolute positions things relative to the whole page. See the code I posted up in my reply to Ben for two examples, one of which is a solution to your problem, but won't work on IE without the rather excellent IE7 JavaScript hacks <url:http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/>. </rant> > Doesn't Mozilla do something similar with XUL now tho? Yup, and it has since before Longhorn for XAML was a glint in MS's eye. >> 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. > > That was my experience. Yup, but that's because you appear to be approaching the problem from the wrong angle. As I said, take a look at that code I put in my reply to Ben. Much goodness in there. :-) K. -- 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 Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:188440 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=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
