Sent by Bruno Fassino on 16 October 2004 17:05
Linda Antonsson wrote:
> How would I comment out the doctype declaration, btw? On
> another page,
> which also needed some hacks to work in IE, I use <!-- Quirk
> on --> at the top of the page. Is that how you mean? :)
Yes, a comment at the top would put IE6 in quirks mode.
This seems to stop the IE6/Win lock up, but I'm not sure it is the best
solution, since you will have anyway the problem to subtract the padding in
the script for some browsers, but not for all.
It's probably better to apply the script to elements not having (vertical)
padding. Can you rework your page and move those paddings to the internal
elements? (This will probably trigger some margin collapsing, so you may
have several things to change.)
> > BTW, the js script seems to have also another problem: if you shrink
> > the window so that the height increases, and then enlarge it again
> > the columns height is not reduced back.
>
> In IE or Mozilla? In Mozilla, this works fine for me with the first
> script, but not with the second. However, the first does do
> some other odd stuff on resize. Odd, since it is called with both onload
> and onresize.
It seems to me this is a problem with both scripts: once you have narrowed
the window if you enlarge it again the columns' height does not reduce back
(unless you do a refresh of course.)
And looking at the scripts a bit more, I'm not convinced at all that is
possible to get with them a page working well in all conditions, when you
resize the window. (the scripts assign a 'not auto' height to the columns,
so their heights do not follow the content anymore when you resize the
window.) I'm starting to think that more work is needed than those scripts
do.
Sorry for the bad news :(
> > The main drawback is the use of some extra (not semantic) wrapper
> > divs, partly to maintain your backgrounds. These divs can
> > probably be
> > reduced (but not totally), creating suitable background graphics and
> > tackling box model problems (current page is more easily
> > editable, in
> > case of widths modification.) As a further warning please note that
> > now the CSS is rather simple, but should you have more 'complex'
> > content in your columns, you may (unfortunately) need to add some
> > hacks.
>
> These are, admittedly, some of the things that I am concerned
> about. I
> do tend to always use textured backgrounds rather than solid colours,
> which always makes it a bit more complex. And given that the design
> isn't finished yet, I suspect that some of the stuff I have
> in mind will break it, and then it'll likely be too complex for me to
> manage to find the right hacks.
Yes, I unsterstand. You have to find a working solution you are most
confident with.
I confess (I know many will disagree here :-) that I will also take into
account a solution using a table (you won't need the script, nor complex CSS
techniques.) Evaluate all the possibilities and then choose.
HTH,
Bruno
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/