Alan Gresley wrote:
> Olivier Sannier wrote:
> [...]
>
>> Thanks, this actually is the only thing of the two you proposed that has
>> any effect.
>> However, the first one got me thinking and I came up with this:
>>
>> *:first-child+html .innerContents
>> {
>> width: 98%;
>> }
>>
>> .resizabl
Olivier Sannier wrote:
[...]
> Thanks, this actually is the only thing of the two you proposed that has
> any effect.
> However, the first one got me thinking and I came up with this:
>
> *:first-child+html .innerContents
> {
> width: 98%;
> }
>
> .resizableArea
> {
> overflow-x: hidden;
> }
Olivier Sannier wrote:
> Too bad there isn't any other way than using the "non standard"
> overflow-x property.
The 'overflow-x' property _is_ standard - CSS3.
Georg
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.c
David Laakso wrote:
> David Laakso wrote:
>
> Error Correction> Should read:
>
>> 2/
>> Only IE/7.0 will see this:
>>
>> *:first-child+html .innerContents {width: 96%;}
Thanks, this actually is the only thing of the two you proposed that has
any effect.
However, the first one got me thinking
Olivier Sannier wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Please have a look at this page:
> http://obones.free.fr/rem_height/
>
> This is my latest attempt at creating a "remaining height" design to
> mimick what I used to do with frames.
> It works quite well and I'm quite happy with the results under
> Firefox/
David Laakso wrote:
Error Correction> Should read:
>
> 2/
> Only IE/7.0 will see this:
>
> *:first-child+html .innerContents {width: 96%;}
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www
Hello all,
Please have a look at this page:
http://obones.free.fr/rem_height/
This is my latest attempt at creating a "remaining height" design to
mimick what I used to do with frames.
It works quite well and I'm quite happy with the results under
Firefox/Seamonkey.
The results under IE are goo
