On Nov 10, 2011, at 5:42 , G.Sørtun wrote:
> > If you say so. I often let 'html' alone do the "fill viewport" job, leaving > 'body' open for other jobs. How to use elements depends mainly on degree of > legacy browser support. I didn't know that html would also be a container somehow. I always thought that it was something behind the all thing. :) Guess not. Let's use html for that then and liberate the body. :) > > 60em may be somewhat equal to 960px under certain, very limited, conditions. > If you're happy with that there's no need to "mess with" both units, just > make up your mind whether it's 'em' or 'px' or some other unit you're gonna > rely on ... and test well. Almost there, so it could be a nice idea to use px and em for those cases (and they could be a lot) where, 960px don't correspond to 60em. Because, by doing both containers one in px and another in em, we guarantee (I still miss how) that even if the default user font is other then 16px the max width will apply ? You have told earlier that: "If those containers have 'width: 100%' declared they can be styled to interact in perfect harmony with min/max-width declared with different units." Can you please elaborate a little bit more ? What role will play width: 100% related with two different units, and two different containers. Please have a look here: http://cssdesk.com/mmpL4 (you can contract the code declarations to the left for a better view); ps - I've just found this cssdesk.com and I'm happy. :) ______________________________________________________________________ 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/
