Daniel Kessler wrote: > Okay, so the basic idea as I see it is to work with the anchors instead > of the li. I saw the li as the more base part and worked from big to > small, but here small was the essential part (the link). > Now that "side li" and "side li:hover" are gutted, do I still need > them? I noted that it worked fine without them.
Nah, you can get rid of em if you don't need to style anything else on them. When it comes to padding and margins, I find it's often best to work with the /innermost/ element. So, in this case, padding on your <a> pushes out on your <li> which pushes out on the <ul> and so on. Rarely do I find I need to style an intermediate box unless it's to zero something out (like margins on ul/li, etc.). In your case, you gain another particular advantage since IE lte 6 doesn't support :hover on most elements, but it will on the anchor. Thus, you get a :hover effect that'll work cross-browser. ;) > thank you for your help Bill. You're most welcome, of course. Glad I could help. --Bill -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ TheHolierGrail.com | MacNimble.com | Cyber-Sandbox.com | Anytowne.com Bill Brown, Web Developer - "From dot concept to dot com since 1999" "The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. -- Albert Einstein ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
