> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Nathan de Vries
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 6:11 AM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
>
> On 18/07/2008, at
On 18/07/2008, at 7:45 AM, David Hucklesby wrote:
Of course, there are several other ways to enclose floats that do
not require that extra DIV.
I would have thought that the method described by PIE [1] would be the
only sane way to do this.
--
Nathan de Vries
[1] http://www.positionisevery
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
Why do you think that it is important to stuff something invisible inside
an
(otherwise) empty div?
For some reason, Internet Explorer thinks an empty DIV - "" -
contains text, and may create a
kevin mcmonagle
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 10:33 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
its used as a shim.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
Why do you think that it is important to stuff
AM
>To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
>
>its used as a shim.
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
>> Why do you think that it is important to stuff something
its used as a shim.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry folks, but am I missing something here?
Why do you think that it is important to stuff something invisible
inside an (otherwise) empty div?
Regards,
Mike
***
List Guide
day, July 17, 2008 10:46 PM
>To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
>Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
>
>> Andrew Newman wrote re: using a DIV to enclose floats:
>>
>>> a little more valid / semantic
>>>
>>> div.clearer {
> Andrew Newman wrote re: using a DIV to enclose floats:
>
>> a little more valid / semantic
>>
>> div.clearer {clear: both; line-height: 0; height: 0;}
>>
>>
>>
Of course, that will create an extra vertical space in the layout. If that
space is unwanted, you could alternatively use this:
Andrew Newman wrote:
a little more valid / semantic
div.clearer {clear: both; line-height: 0; height: 0;}
On 17/07/2008, at 4:04 AM, kevin mcmonagle wrote:
now i can validate.
thank you
-kevin
***
List Guidelines: h
a little more valid / semantic
div.clearer {clear: both; line-height: 0; height: 0;}
On 17/07/2008, at 4:04 AM, kevin mcmonagle wrote:
Thank you david,
a tip from that article has me sorted.
I put a div at the bottom of the rapper content like this:
.clear{clear:both}
nice
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of kevin mcmonagle
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:05 AM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: Re: [WSG] firefox treatment of wrapper overflow height
>
> Thank you
These days it's also known how to do a clear without an additional clearing
div... try giving the troublesome div overflow:hidden en you should also be
sorted.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 8:04 PM, kevin mcmonagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Thank you david,
> a tip from that article has me sorted.
>
Thank you david,
a tip from that article has me sorted.
I put a div at the bottom of the rapper content like this:
.clear{clear:both}
nice trick just kind of forces,
but I still dont understand why the outer wrapper would'nt scale
automatically with three
columns in an inner wrapper
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:08:47 +0100, kevin mcmonagle wrote:
> hi,
> I have a wrapper in that wont scale to its contained content/divs but there
> are no
> heights set in the divs that i can see. Is there something else that can
> cause this? -
Yes. If the content has A.P. blocks or floats that ar
14 matches
Mail list logo
