IE5 ignores padding or margin for inline elements - workaround?

[Markus Ernst]

Hi

Does somebody know a workaround for the fact that IE5 does not apply margin
and padding to inline elements? I have a navigation with those styles:

ul#navigation {
border-top:1px #000000 solid;
border-bottom:1px #000000 solid;
list-style:none;
margin:0;
padding:0.2em 0 0.2em 2em;
white-space:nowrap;
}
ul#navigation li {
display:inline;
margin:0;
padding:0 2em 0 0;
font-weight:bold;
color:#000000;
}

Works nicely in standards browsers and IE6. Can this get fixed for IE5
without breaking other browsers, or even using deprecated HTML?

Thanks for a hint.

--
Markus

[Els]

Markus Ernst wrote:

Hi
Hello
Does somebody know a workaround for the fact that IE5 does not apply margin
and padding to inline elements?
I've only had succes with applying a height to them, but even a 1px
height will result in a higher height than I usually want.
I have a navigation with those styles:

ul#navigation {
border-top:1px #000000 solid;
border-bottom:1px #000000 solid;
list-style:none;
margin:0;
padding:0.2em 0 0.2em 2em;
white-space:nowrap;
}
ul#navigation li {
display:inline;
margin:0;
padding:0 2em 0 0;
font-weight:bold;
color:#000000;
}

Works nicely in standards browsers and IE6. Can this get fixed for IE5
without breaking other browsers, or even using deprecated HTML?
I forgot if I apply the height to the <li> element, or to the <a>
element inside, really, but the trick is in the height :-)
Thanks for a hint.

You're welcome.

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Dirty White Boy - Badlands

[Markus Ernst]

Els wrote:

Does somebody know a workaround for the fact that IE5 does not apply
margin and padding to inline elements?

I've only had succes with applying a height to them, but even a 1px
height will result in a higher height than I usually want.

I forgot if I apply the height to the <li> element, or to the <a>
element inside, really, but the trick is in the height :-)

Ouf... height is one of those dimensions that are differently computed in
IE5, isn't it? I guess before adding Tantek hacks and adjusting heights for
different kinds of rendering engines... I will rather sniff IE5 with PHP and
add some &nbsp;s then...

Thanks a lot for your input and enjoy working on saturday ;-)

--
Markus

[Spartanicus]

"Markus Ernst" <derernst@NO#SP #AMgmx.ch> wrote:

Does somebody know a workaround for the fact that IE5 does not apply margin
and padding to inline elements? I have a navigation with those styles:

Unless you have an unusual high percentage of IE5.0 clients, I wouldn't
worry about it (IE5.5 does apply padding to inline elements).

--
Spartanicus

[Els]

Markus Ernst wrote:

Els wrote:

Does somebody know a workaround for the fact that IE5 does not apply
margin and padding to inline elements?
I've only had succes with applying a height to them, but even a 1px
height will result in a higher height than I usually want.

I forgot if I apply the height to the <li> element, or to the <a>
element inside, really, but the trick is in the height :-)

Ouf... height is one of those dimensions that are differently computed in
IE5, isn't it? I guess before adding Tantek hacks and adjusting heights for
different kinds of rendering engines... I will rather sniff IE5 with PHP and
add some &nbsp;s then...

Your choice.

But I now guess you only want to separate them horizontally? It helps
to have line-breaks in the code between the </li> and the next <li>.
Only gives a little space though, if you want more, than yes: height,
or &nbsp;.

But I take it you have something against hacks?
Thanks a lot for your input and enjoy working on saturday ;-)

I can see the wink, but I still don't get t - I'm not working atm if
that's what you think?

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Chuck Berry - Maybelline

[Markus Ernst]

Spartanicus wrote:

"Markus Ernst" <derernst@NO#SP #AMgmx.ch> wrote:

Does somebody know a workaround for the fact that IE5 does not apply
margin and padding to inline elements? I have a navigation with
those styles:

Unless you have an unusual high percentage of IE5.0 clients, I
wouldn't worry about it (IE5.5 does apply padding to inline elements).

Oh that's good news, thank you!

--
Markus

[Markus Ernst]

Els wrote:

But I take it you have something against hacks?

I prefer server side hacks to client side ones, because I have more control
over the output.

Thanks a lot for your input and enjoy working on saturday ;-)

I can see the wink, but I still don't get t - I'm not working atm if
that's what you think?

Yes, wrong assumption of mine... so enjoy whatever you do!

--
Markus

[Els]

Markus Ernst wrote:

Els wrote:

But I take it you have something against hacks?

I prefer server side hacks to client side ones, because I have more control
over the output.

I prefer to use hacks based on what a browser is capable of, not based
on possibly wrongly sniffed UA strings.

Thanks a lot for your input and enjoy working on saturday ;-)

I can see the wink, but I still don't get t - I'm not working atm if
that's what you think?

Yes, wrong assumption of mine... so enjoy whatever you do!

Tnx ;-)

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Deep Purple - Speed King

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Markus Ernst wrote:

Els wrote:

But I take it you have something against hacks?

I prefer server side hacks to client side ones, because I have more control
over the output.

Not necessarily. Think about cache servers. Think about a saved copy
of a web page, browsed with various browsers. And so on. And the
other more-obvious problems, of course, not limited to the widespread
phenomenon of web-compatible browsers having to pretend to be MSIE
because of so many proprietary "web" pages refusing to talk to them
unless they do so.

Sending your well-"controlled " output to the wrong browser is surely
worse than doing nothing?

[Eric B. Bednarz]

"Alan J. Flavell" <fl*****@ph.gla .ac.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Markus Ernst wrote:

I prefer server side hacks to client side ones, because I have
more control over the output.

Not necessarily. Think about cache servers. Think about a saved
copy of a web page, browsed with various browsers. And so on.

That's the problem, indeed. Of course *anybody* who negotiates
indicates that the outcome may vary. Nudge nudge, wink wink.
And the other more-obvious problems, of course, not limited to the
widespread phenomenon of web-compatible browsers having to pretend
to be MSIE because of so many proprietary "web" pages refusing to
talk to them unless they do so.

The UA string is particulary unreliable, but doublechecking against the
accept header server-side increases the odds to hit the right horse
remarkably for certain browsers of sorts. A request for text/html is
yet to be seen even in the OS-component-pre-releases de jour.

It's fun that even when using the inherently safer navigator object
client-side (well, if available) some people still seem to be inclined
to consult the easily spoofed userAgent instead of appName and
appVersion (fumbling with the registry apart, or local proxies that are
deliberately set up to be reasonably unreasonable :-).

But it would certainly be enlightening to figure out why it is so hard
to grasp that 'control over the output' is a matter of request instead
of response in this context (I *do* know everyday's our-cms-is-
basically-broken-and-I'm-not-authorized-to-fix-the-source-of-the-
problem situation, Tfornotbringing thatupIA :-).
--
Goodbye and keep cold