Nick, I think the trick here is to examine the nature of the containers and whether they are block or in-line elements. I just don't have time to revisit until next weekend ... like all of us, no doubt.
I like the idea of using an unordered list since it's semantically correct so I'll begin there and work my way to the bounding containers. Of course, it may not be possible, but in my experience there is *always* a way. Just a question of finding it. ... and then if falls apart in Explorer ... Cheers, Mike Pepper Accessible Web Developer (indoors when it's a glorious sunny day) www.seowebsitepromotion.com www.gawds.org -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nick Gleitzman Sent: 06 June 2004 16:43 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Centering a liquid grid of image thumbs and captions Thanks again, Kristof. I appreciate the time you've put into this; I have to get back to work too. I'm not sure that even nesting tables would give the liquid layout; surely a table by definition has a hard-coded number of columns? I guess my vision is of a CSS solution that not only equals what tables can do, but betters it - by allowing the 'rows' to have a variable number of columns, according to the width of the enclosing container. I know we can do that, but only, it seems, justified left or right... Nick ___________________________ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ On Monday, June 7, 2004, at 01:19 AM, Kristof Neirynck wrote: >> OK, I lied. Second question: your solution is very usable; I class >> this as 'elegant' because all the img/caption pairs are contained in >> one (open-ended) list. Just what I was after. But just out of >> interest, do you think it's possible to go one step further, and >> style the list so that the number of images in a row varies as window >> is resized - still keeping the 'grid' centred - for a truly liquid >> layout? > > No it can't be done without javascript. > I don't have the time to work on a script for that right now. > > You said you wanted something to replace *ONE* table. > This does replace one table. > To replace nested tables is a whole other ballgame. ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ***************************************************** ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
