Tom Livingston wrote: >> Sure it is. Adding clearing elements, and the ensuing additional CSS (or >> extra clearing markup), makes code less readable for, in most cases, no good >> reason. Since overflow: hidden or overflow: auto does the trick, the whole >> issue of clearing floats becomes essentially a non-issue, and saves extra >> markup. >> >> > > Hold on. > > Adding overflow:auto; on a container will clear any and all floats > inside said container all by itself!?!? Cross-browser??!! And PIE's > Easy Clearing is 'so last year' too?!? Where have I been??? > > same place as me i guess! I thought overflow wasn't a good cross-browser solution either.. ah well, everyday's a school day.
As for this CSSf thing I can see it being useful for those new to CSS as a learning aid but its not going to work as a specification. /Formatting/ CSS is all down to your personal preference, the important thing is making use of sensible and semantic id names and class names etc.. If another developer can find the bits they're looking for easily they could then just use their own text editor to format it how they want if it's so important. Guidelines and specs are two different things, CSSf is the former. Rob ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7b2 testing hub -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
