Jason, with your alignment and Div tag expertise as seen here, I was 
wondering if you might lend a hand in helping figure out the problem in 
bug http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104012.. whether Mozilla 
is fine & evangalism is needed, or there is a bug in Mozilla's IMG src 
align=Right.. code with using Div tags.. under certain doctypes..

-Thanks,
Dennis

Jason Johnston wrote:

> text-align by definition is for aligning text.
> A <div> element is *not* text.
> Therefore text-align should not affect the alignment of the <div> within 
> its container, only the text within it.  MSIE is incorrectly "aligning" 
> the <div> based on text-align.
> 
> Instead, use the CSS constrainment rules: if an element has all but one 
> of its box properties set to an explicit length, then that one property 
> will have to expand to fill the space of its containing block.
> 
> For instance:
> div {width:200px;padding:0px;border:0px;margin:0px;margin-left:auto;}
> 
> Since everything is constrained except the margin-left, then the left 
> margin will expand to fill the extra space within the containing block, 
> giving the effect of "right-aligning" the <div>.
> 
> It is possible to use this correct method in addition to the incorrect 
> "text-align" method to ensure cross-browser compatibility.
> 
> Hope this helps
> --J
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Holmes wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>>
>> If a DIV element contains other, smaller DIV elements, and the parent div
>> has "text-align: right" in its style, then presumably the descendant DIVs
>> should be aligned against the right side of the parent. This is indeed 
>> what
>> happens in IE5.5 and IE6, but not in NS (6.01 through 6.2). Here's an
>> example:
>>
>> http://www.halfbakedsoftware.com/iesvic/website/
>>
>> If you click on the "Research" menu item, it should expand to show six
>> subitems. In IE these are aligned to the right, but NS seems to ignore 
>> this
>> setting and align them to the left. Can anyone confirm this is a bug, 
>> and if
>> so, is there a workaround?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 


Reply via email to