On Tuesday 24 December 2002 11:49 am, Andrew Rodland wrote: > On Tuesday 24 December 2002 09:28 am, Erendil at aol.com wrote: > > Ok. My name is Alabaster, with an A not an I. (Stop saying Alibaster!) > > > > Fifth, it's all valid CSS (sort of) and XHTML, so if Konqueror doens't > > work with it, it's a failure on their end to comply with w3c standards. > > Use mozilla. > > Actually, I wouldn't quite say that konqueror is noncompliant. > The reason that it came out "freaky", as I said, is that konqueror, not > being the brightest about overflow: auto, decided to make all of the boxes > overflow:display, and you have FAR more text in each box than fits. (What > did I say about pixel sizes? They're bad, mmmkay?)
Okay, so on closer inspection, that is non-compliant (well, violates a SHOULD), but it's a damn minor point. Just don't do silly things like that. :) As for the other issues, well, it looks alright on a browser that renders it properly. But might I suggest that you could recreate it with clever use of float: and clear:, and without any pixel specifications (replaced mostly by %), and with no height specifications (replaced by nothing whatsoever). There might be need for one position: relative, but actually, I think not. Anyway, that'll make the layout much more flexible on browsers of various sizes and fonts of various sizes. --hobbs _______________________________________________ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
