On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Philippe Wittenbergh <e...@l-c-n.com> wrote:
> > > On Jul 12, 2016, at 1:13 AM, John J <cr8...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > At the link below, the name, email, subject fields don't appear to be > > obeying rules governing width as in the previous media breaks.. > > > > at 360 and 320, those fields exceed the width of their parent, rather > than > > respecting padding set prior..maybe I'm missing something..if I have my > > rules set up correctly, the css should behave a certain way until told > > differently in the next media query, right? > > > > Thank you for any insight about this! > > > > John > > > > http://john-a-johnson.com/contact.php > > As suggested by Peter, the box-sizing rules are messing things up (big > time). > > You have, on line 6 of style.css > *, *:before, *:after { box-sizing: inherit; } > > That is a sledgehammer – and incredibly damaging – approach to a > non-existent problem. Remove that rule and only override the default > box-sizing in a case by case approach. > > Philippe > -- While Philippe may well me right about Peter Gabriel singing the theme song for this technique, I have used this method frequently, with a slight difference. I use: html{box-sizing: border-box;} *, *:before, *:after { box-sizing: inherit; } Possibly picked it up from here: https://css-tricks.com/inheriting-box-sizing-probably-slightly-better-best-practice/ Though I can't put my finger on it right now, I have read where this method isn't really as a performance hit as it may seem. -- Tom Livingston | Senior Front End Developer | Media Logic | ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | medialogic.com #663399 ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [css-d@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/
