Scott Hamm wrote:
>On 11/29/05, Zoe M. Gillenwater [EMAIL-REMOVED]> wrote:
>>Scott Hamm wrote:
>>>I've been asking around in webdesign mailing list for feedbacks and
>>>learned a lot about em, % and accessibility in CSS part. I'm trying
>>>to use % so I can add up to 100% and I've been told that em is better
>>>than % because of IE goof-ups. I've read in various CSS articles and
>>>they had their own preferences. If em is the best method to set up
>>>CSS, then how can I add up the width to remain fluid like %?
>>So it's up to you whether you want the layout to be dependent on font
>>size or window size. Or neither (fixed width via pixels). I don't know
>>of any percentage-based IE bugs that can be avoided by switching to ems
>>(can you give us the source of this information?), and anyway, an em
>>layout is not the same as a percentage layout, so don't use IE bugs as
>>your deciding factor of which to use.
>My source would be http://www.deafaviator.org/fbcom/index.php (IE part
>will be fixed -- I'm tired of working up on hacks after each little
>change). My objective here is to leave right side on the end of
>browser without going over or under.
Scott, I meant that I wanted to know the source of the statement "em is
better than % because of IE goof-ups." I don't know this to be true, so
if you can tell us where you heard this from we can take a look and see
if they have wrong information, know something we don't know, or if you
just misunderstood them.
Incidentally, your layout appears just fine in IE. The text looks a
little goofy and there is extra space between the links, but no problems
with the layout itself.
Also, please remember to trim out any material from the previous message
to which you are not directly replying.
Zoe M. Gillenwater
Design Services Manager
UNC Highway Safety Research Center
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/