> Christian Montoya wrote: >> Are you guys saying you would prefer a javascript solution + invalid >> css to my pure css solution, which could be hidden behind conditional >> comments to eliminate hacks? >> >> http://christianmontoya.com/examples/float-contain.html > > Nothing wrong with your solution, but it substitutes a well-working part > of CSS standards with a CSS workaround - just because a browser isn't up > to the job. > > I prefer to use a standard-spec that works in good browser, _as is_, and > mimic it in browsers that are not up to standards yet. In this case > that's 'min-width', which can be simulated by an ugly but well-working > IE-expression. >
Although you should remember that expressions don't work if the client has scripting disabled; Christian's hack, though ugly to read, prevents one tehcnology being dependant on another for correct operation. Just my tuppence, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
