Sent by Aaron Mehl on 16 December 2002 16:04
thanks
Aaron
--On Monday, December 16, 2002 11:38:27 AM -0500 "Alan K. Gay"
[EMAIL-REMOVED]> wrote:
>> > At one end of the spectrum, by making minimal use of padding and
> border
>> > (ie setting their dimension to zero) and not relying on
> pixel-perfect
>> > alignment between block-level elements, you can usually ignore
>> > cross-browser box-model differences entirely.
>>
>> Is this acheivable. My golden rule idea is a vanilla flavor, that
> works
>> cross browser. I am guessing that this first approach uses float and
> or
>> absoulte positioning. Does this limit the complexity of the design
>> template. IE can this approach permit vanilla designs with multiple
>> colums,
>> nested divs etc.
>
> If you set border:0px and padding:0px, then the width and height issues
> go away. So a vanilla rule to always use zero border and padding makes
> sense if you are trying to eliminate cross-browser issues... it's just
> awfully confining to almost any design.
>
>
>>
>>
> ========================================================================
> ==
>> =
>> ===
>> >
>> > At the other end, SNIP
>>
>> > From this I deduce that you feel that padding is not a postioning
> tool
>> but
>> a visual one. you don't mention margins. I guess I get confused
> because
>> you
>> can move a box around by changing any of the parameters. border (width
>> height) line-height, margin, padding, float and absolute positioning.
>>
>> If what you are saying holds true some of these should be reserved for
>> visual presentation and others for positioning.
>>
>> so knowing this difference could be a rule.
>>
>> (the interaction of many things effect position, but if I remove from
> my
>> bag of tricks things that are not ment to be for positioning maybe I
> will
>> gain some consistancy???)
>>
>
> I don't think you can peel this apart. Padding and border, when
> present, effect positioning, and can be used for visual if you give
> them color. IE prior to 6.0/strict incorrectly includes them inside
> "width"... correct implementation is that they are outside width. So
> for IE <6, total width=width+margin(s). For compliant browsers, total
> width=width+padding(s)+border(s)+margin(s). Ditto for height.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> =======================================================================
> ==
>> =
>> ==
>> > So.... my SNIP
>>
>> Ok good, but is there a way to make a vanilla that side steps the
> issue of
>> browser issues.
>> It could be the answer is no. But at least it will be possible to pin
> the
>> factors down a bit.
>
> See above.
>
>
>
>
>
>
AM in the AM (PM)
