On 16/03/2010, at 12:18 AM, Chris Blake wrote: > > > > On 16/03/2010, at 12:01 AM, Climis, Tim wrote: > >>> 100%px isn't valid, unless my programming mind is tying to make too >>> much sense. >> >> I think that's the problem... His template is putting in 'px' even >> though he doesn't want one. And he wants to have a width of 100% in >> spite of it. >> >>> Stylesheets should never overwrite a style defined in the actual tag >> (Unless it's on the user's side). >> >> On the other hand, that gave me an idea that may work (completely >> untested mind you): >> >> Invalid styles should be ignored. So, if you specify "width: >> 100%px" in the inline style, and then width: 100% in the style >> sheet, it might actually get applied. It would be among the ugliest >> hacks I've ever seen though. >> >> ---Tim >> >> > > You're right that's what I am trying to do. I will give it a go for > the sake of experimentation. I may even write "width(px): uglyhack% in > the joomla backend so that it can't even get a number from it! > > style="width: uglyhack%px ;height: 255px;"> > > There goes validation ;-P > > Thanks to both! > > Cheers, CB
The Hack worked but it's made a hash of the animation and navigation of the module. It might come in handy for something else though. Thanks! CB ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
