Keith,
By default. block-level elements occupy the full available width, thus any
following block-level elements can only appear directly below. This is as
long as they are statically positioned, and in standard (which everything
is, by default). The same applies to paragraphs, headings, lists,
Barney Carroll wrote:
Keith,
By default. block-level elements occupy the full available width, thus any
following block-level elements can only appear directly below.
I am unconvinced of this explanation. At
http://web-consultants.org.uk/sites/tests/Block-level-elements/DIVs.html
On 5/06/2011 11:05 PM, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
Barney Carroll wrote:
Keith,
By default. block-level elements occupy the full available width, thus
any
following block-level elements can only appear directly below.
I am unconvinced of this explanation. At
Alan Gresley wrote:
It is really do with block flow direction.
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-writing-modes/#text-flow
| The block flow direction is the direction in which
| block-level boxes stack and the direction in which
| line boxes stack within a block container. The
|
On 5/06/2011 11:53 PM, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
Alan Gresley wrote:
It is really do with block flow direction.
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-writing-modes/#text-flow
| The block flow direction is the direction in which
| block-level boxes stack and the direction in which
|
On Jun 5, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
Barney Carroll wrote:
Keith,
By default. block-level elements occupy the full available width, thus any
following block-level elements can only appear directly below.
I am unconvinced of this explanation. At
On Jun 5, 2011, at 10:53 PM, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
So, what would you expect to happen if the writing mode were top-to-bottom ?
Would you then expect the DIVs to stack side by side ? I would not, but of
course I am always open to being surprised !
They would be stacked
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Keith Purtell keithpurt...@keithpurtell.com
wrote:
This may seem really basic, but I'm trying to figure out best practice
for stacking DIVs vertically. The first idea I had was a page with two
fixed-width DIVs inside a wrapper DIV of that same width. I thought
