Yeah, meant display of course, and tried it with display, and used display,
and I have no idea why the hell I wrote position here ;)
Klaus Hartl-3 wrote:
>
> frando schrieb:
>
>> - Changing the css to position: none and then back to position: block
>> - changing the position css attribute to
One more comment... As you probably figured out from looking at the
generated source, the culprit is likely to be the animation code, which sets
those unwanted attributes when it animates an item.
So one good test would be to remove all animation and see if it generates
better code.
It will also
> I moved "Testnode" up and then moved it to the right, then
> used FireBug's Inspect tool to reveal the generated HTML.
> This is what I saw:
Actually I left out part of it by mistake. Here's the entire UL:
When you have a problem like this, your first thought should be to look at
the generated HTML using Microsoft's DevToolBar in IE or either FireBug or
View Source Chart for Firefox.
I moved "Testnode" up and then moved it to the right, then used FireBug's
Inspect tool to reveal the generated HTML.
frando schrieb:
> - Changing the css to position: none and then back to position: block
> - changing the position css attribute to 'table-cell'
Did you mean the position *property* or did you mean display? The values
you are talking of are for the display property, so if you tried what
you wrot
I'm currently trying to modify an ul-tree dynamically.
Moving elements up, down and left is working perfectly.
My problem is that, when moving elements right (iow creating a new ul as a
child to an existing li), the parent element is not expanding, so the newly
created ul is overlapping with oth