Excellent...
So, I drop <img src="..." width="200" height="100" alt=""> into my HTML and
.scaledimages {width: 30%;} in my CSS and the CSS % dimensions will overide
the width of the image dropped into the HTML? Seems like a conflict... or do
I remove the width & height from the <img> tag?
There won't be a lot of these images, maybe 4, and they won't be huge. Each
one will have a max size of maybe 300px so the resizing should not be
extensive and hopefully won't cause any browsers to choke on them.
As for my header on this site I've used the sliding door technique with a
large background image containing the background & company logo on the left
with another image of logos floated right so it'll move.
Thanks,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Gunlaug Sørtun [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Setting image-width in 'percentage' makes it relate to container size
(width) - which is what you're asking for, while 'em' makes it relate to
font-size.
Image-height should normally be set to 'auto' when using 'percentage-width',
to make the image scale. You can also use 'min-width' and 'max-width' to
keep the image(s) within reasonable size(s).
FWIW: I have an image with 'percentage-width' as "header" on most pages on
my own site. 50% width and a fixed (non-scaling) height. May not look like
much, but it behaves as intended across browser-land.
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7 information -- 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/
