By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
446,201 Members | 937 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 446,201 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Want box around an image with flowing text

P: n/a
I've seen a page using display, and especially display table that did
some neat things with boxes, but basically it only worked with Mozilla
browsers. Fell over fairly badly with Opera and Safari (I don't have
IE, but I have my suspicions that wouldn't work either).

I'd like to use CSS to put some boxes down the middle of a page. The
page is intended to be fluid, but the boxes all need to be the same
width, which can be variable according to page size the viewer uses.
I've used border to make the boxes.

Each box needs to have an h2 at the top left outside the box, just
touching the box. The h2 is also in a narrow box, but with its own
color and background color, taking maybe 40% of the width, with the text
aligned right.

Within each box can be probably one (or possibly but unlikely more)
paragraphs of text, flowing around probably one or (possibly) more
images. I'd like to be able to decide which side of each box the
image(s) go. I'd like the text to flow around the images.

I didn't have any great CSS problems getting text to flow around a
thumbnail image at http://www.sheltersrus.com.au and that seems to work
pretty well when you resize the page or text or zoom it. However I
obviously just lucked out in what I am trying there.

When I try the same sort of thing with boxes, my h2 boxes fall apart,
and my (larger than thumbnail) images poke out of my boxes. I have a
sample at http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial1.html which has the
CSS included in the page for ease of manipulation. CSS and HTML both
validate (at least, they do when I don't include the CSS in the HTML
page).

Anyone have any suggestions. I'm trying to pull as many HTML tags out
of the page as I can, and simplify everything as much as I can.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 3 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
14 Replies


P: n/a
Eric Lindsay <NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
I've seen a page using display, and especially display table that did
some neat things with boxes, but basically it only worked with Mozilla
browsers.
URL?
When I try the same sort of thing with boxes, my h2 boxes fall apart,
and my (larger than thumbnail) images poke out of my boxes. I have a
sample at http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial1.html which has the
CSS included in the page for ease of manipulation.
Before the closing div of each "box": <div style="clear:both"></div>
CSS and HTML both
validate (at least, they do when I don't include the CSS in the HTML
page).


Add the required type attribute to the <style> element as the validator
tells you to.

--
Spartanicus
Nov 3 '05 #2

P: n/a
In article
<9g********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Eric Lindsay <NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
I've seen a page using display, and especially display table that did
some neat things with boxes, but basically it only worked with Mozilla
browsers.
URL?


Not on the internet. If I can collect all the pieces of it I can see
about putting it up somewhere. Well, actually, I would mostly be
missing the graphics. I can probably find the HTML and CSS, if that
would be sufficient?

I particularly liked the way it let you use a three column layout in the
footer, for the three parts of the address. But it was using display
table stuff.
and my (larger than thumbnail) images poke out of my boxes.


Before the closing div of each "box": <div style="clear:both"></div>


I thought that I had tried that, without any success. Clear was what I
used in my two column layout.

However I found that using overflow: auto; in the main_box div seemed to
have the desired result of keeping everything in its boxes. I did find
a discussion that using overflow: hidden; triggered fewer bugs. Since
my layout is intended to be liquid, I may try this.
Add the required type attribute to the <style> element as the validator
tells you to.


Opps, sorry about that. Now corrected. Thanks Spartanicus.

The revised html and css validated test page is at
http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial2.html

I still have several problems with it.

I'd like the blue address boxes at the bottom to be in a three column
layout all level across the bottom of the page. Google has provided a
nice list of three column articles for me to read, so I imagine I'll
find something in one of them. However pointers to the best treatment
are always welcome.

I would like to put a logo in the top left corner of that page, with the
image coming via the stylesheet. I managed to do this with
http://www.sheltersrus.com.au but I can't seem to repeat the trick of
positioning it when I give it a position like top: 10px; left: 10px; In
fact, I can't see how I managed to position it originally, given the CSS
is wrong. Using the same code (with or without the wrong
borderposition bit) just doesn't work. Any pointers on that? That bit
is driving me nuts, given I have a working example in front on me and
can't duplicate it.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 4 '05 #3

P: n/a
Eric Lindsay <NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
>I've seen a page using display, and especially display table that did
>some neat things with boxes, but basically it only worked with Mozilla
>browsers.
URL?


Not on the internet. If I can collect all the pieces of it I can see
about putting it up somewhere. Well, actually, I would mostly be
missing the graphics. I can probably find the HTML and CSS, if that
would be sufficient?


Sure.
I particularly liked the way it let you use a three column layout in the
footer, for the three parts of the address. But it was using display
table stuff.
I find it hard to believe that Safari or Opera would have a problem with
it, display:table* stuff (aka CSS tables) is not supported by IE as you
suspected.
Before the closing div of each "box": <div style="clear:both"></div>


I thought that I had tried that, without any success.


Works for me in IE, Opera, Gecko:
http://homepage.ntlworld.ie/spartanicus/trial1.html
What browser(s) are you using to test with?
However I found that using overflow: auto; in the main_box div seemed to
have the desired result of keeping everything in its boxes.
Doesn't work in IE/win.
The revised html and css validated test page is at
http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial2.html

I still have several problems with it.

I'd like the blue address boxes at the bottom to be in a three column
layout all level across the bottom of the page. Google has provided a
nice list of three column articles for me to read, so I imagine I'll
find something in one of them. However pointers to the best treatment
are always welcome.
A method using absolute positioning is probably the best way to do the
"3 column" footer. A method that uses floats likely has the drawback of
having to rearrange the order of the content. If you don't need to
support IE then a CSS table is best.
I would like to put a logo in the top left corner of that page, with the
image coming via the stylesheet. I managed to do this with
http://www.sheltersrus.com.au but I can't seem to repeat the trick of
positioning it when I give it a position like top: 10px; left: 10px; In
fact, I can't see how I managed to position it originally, given the CSS
is wrong. Using the same code (with or without the wrong
borderposition bit) just doesn't work. Any pointers on that?


Do you want it placed in the header, or beneath it?

--
Spartanicus
Nov 4 '05 #4

P: n/a
In article
<9d********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Sure.
OK, probably have to be after the weekend, since it is on one of the
architect's Macs.
I find it hard to believe that Safari or Opera would have a problem with
it, display:table* stuff (aka CSS tables) is not supported by IE as you
suspected.
It was Safari 2 that broke, and it was probably on display: table-cell.
But if IE (PC) has problems then I don't want to go near it. Especially
since I don't have Ie (PC) here to test things with.
Before the closing div of each "box": <div style="clear:both"></div>


I thought that I had tried that, without any success.


Works for me in IE, Opera, Gecko:
http://homepage.ntlworld.ie/spartanicus/trial1.html
What browser(s) are you using to test with?


I normally use Safari 2, and have the Macintosh versions versions of
Opera and FireFox. Some other people have recently pointed me at the
DOM Inspector in Firefox, and also the add on that does CSS stuff. I
may end up using Firefox more (especially since Safari still seems to
have its memory leak).
However I found that using overflow: auto; in the main_box div seemed to
have the desired result of keeping everything in its boxes.


Doesn't work in IE/win.


Damn! How about overflow: hidden; ? I found a page that claimed this
worked with IE 5 and 6 on PC. With a fluid layout I should never have
any hidden content there anyway. In fact, I'm only making provision
for more than one paragraph because I like having text on web pages. My
chances of getting much text from the architects are really low. So far
my total text content from them has consisted of their business card
(which doesn't actually include their address). Opps, no, Jim sent me
an email of really silly quotes he has seen in architectural magazine -
I don't think I can use much of that without moving into high satire.
A method using absolute positioning is probably the best way to do the
"3 column" footer. A method that uses floats likely has the drawback of
having to rearrange the order of the content. If you don't need to
support IE then a CSS table is best.


With IE still having 80% of the browser world, I have to support it,
whatever my preferences. It wouldn't be fair to do otherwise. I've
done a version of the three column footer using floats, and it sort of
works. I've left red borders as a troubleshooting tool on any divs that
I have problems with, and as you can see I am nowhere near the right
hand edge of the page. Must be at least 1%-2% away from it. Hmm, maybe
I should do a separate class for the last paragraph, and make that float
right? I hate having classes for every problem paragraph.

Current revision is at http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial3.html
(I am using different files so there is a partial trail of changes).

Looking on the bright side, the architects are not really looking for
walk in customers, so they may just drop the physical address details
(which isn't on their business card), which brings me back to a two
column layout for the footer.

When I visited their office to talk about site content I accused them of
not being serious about advertising. This was on the basis that they
were not in Yellow Pages, they were not in any Internet list of
Queensland architects, and their White Pages listing wasn't in the
business section. In fact it was in the residential, it didn't say
architect, and the automatic map is wrong by 10 kilometres (which is
better than the phone book map for me, which is wrong by 1200 km!)

Let me see, what did they say? Jim decided he desperately needed to
repair a gasket on his boat engine, disappeared to the sailing club to
launch his dinghy, and told the only person in the office who likes
computers to deal with everything.
I would like to put a logo in the top left corner of that page, with the
image coming via the stylesheet. I managed to do this with
http://www.sheltersrus.com.au but I can't seem to repeat the trick of
positioning it when I give it a position like top: 10px; left: 10px; In
fact, I can't see how I managed to position it originally, given the CSS
is wrong. Using the same code (with or without the wrong
borderposition bit) just doesn't work. Any pointers on that?


Do you want it placed in the header, or beneath it?


It would be really nice to place the logo in the header, right up in the
top left corner. I figure when I persuade the architects to do a real
logo drawing I can have them make the background of the thing the same
colour as the background of the header. That is assuming Jim likes that
colour (I stole the colour from his business card).

What really gets me is I can't figure out how I made such a mess of the
logo in that other site. The use of borderposition was obviously a typo
for background-position, but how come http://www.sheltersrus.com.au
works? Every time I think I understand a little bit of CSS, something
bites me again.

On a side issue, you had a nice example of a centered photo gallery on
your site. Would it be OK if I used that for a Concepts page for these
folks. They seem to have a bunch of neat drawings of projects that were
never taken beyond the concept drawing stage (usually failed financing).
But I thought it might be nice to add a page showing one drawing of each
concept. Your photo gallery struck me as a nice approach, even though I
can't get much search engine traction from so little text. Happy to
give credit and link.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 4 '05 #5

P: n/a
In article
<9d********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote:
I would like to put a logo in the top left corner of that page, with the
image coming via the stylesheet. I managed to do this with
http://www.sheltersrus.com.au but I can't seem to repeat the trick of
positioning it when I give it a position like top: 10px; left: 10px; In
fact, I can't see how I managed to position it originally, given the CSS
is wrong. Using the same code (with or without the wrong
borderposition bit) just doesn't work. Any pointers on that?


Do you want it placed in the header, or beneath it?


img {position: absolute; top: 10px; right: 10px; }

That is how I do it, isn't it? I wonder why I couldn't see that before?

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 4 '05 #6

P: n/a
Eric Lindsay <NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
>> Before the closing div of each "box": <div style="clear:both"></div>
>
>I thought that I had tried that, without any success.
Works for me in IE, Opera, Gecko:
http://homepage.ntlworld.ie/spartanicus/trial1.html
What browser(s) are you using to test with?


I normally use Safari 2, and have the Macintosh versions versions of
Opera and FireFox.


I don't have ready access to a Mac, for Safari a &nbsp; may be needed in
the div, or perhaps a (small) height needs to be defined for it.

The Mac versions of Opera and Gecko based browsers should render
identically to their Win counterparts.
>However I found that using overflow: auto; in the main_box div seemed to
>have the desired result of keeping everything in its boxes.


Doesn't work in IE/win.


Damn! How about overflow: hidden; ?


Also no go.
I found a page that claimed this worked with IE 5 and 6 on PC.
If I change your example so that quirks mode is triggered in IE then it
sort of works, but triggering quirks mode does other things to your
example that you don't want to know about :-/
Hmm, maybe
I should do a separate class for the last paragraph, and make that float
right?
I'd rethink the footer design, what you want is possible, but it's a
royal pain in the rear getting it to work in IE and proper browsers. If
you use a 3 column CSS layout template then you still have to sort out
the alignment of the blocks.
Current revision is at http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial3.html
(I am using different files so there is a partial trail of changes).
The footer works well in Opera & Mozilla, the last address block wraps
to a new line in IE/win. Additionally in IE/win the display of the "tab"
headers is now messed up.
>I would like to put a logo in the top left corner of that page, with the
>image coming via the stylesheet. I managed to do this with
>http://www.sheltersrus.com.au but I can't seem to repeat the trick of
>positioning it when I give it a position like top: 10px; left: 10px; In
>fact, I can't see how I managed to position it originally, given the CSS
>is wrong. Using the same code (with or without the wrong
>borderposition bit) just doesn't work. Any pointers on that?


Do you want it placed in the header, or beneath it?


It would be really nice to place the logo in the header, right up in the
top left corner. I figure when I persuade the architects to do a real
logo drawing I can have them make the background of the thing the same
colour as the background of the header. That is assuming Jim likes that
colour (I stole the colour from his business card).

What really gets me is I can't figure out how I made such a mess of the
logo in that other site. The use of borderposition was obviously a typo
for background-position, but how come http://www.sheltersrus.com.au
works? Every time I think I understand a little bit of CSS, something
bites me again.

On a side issue, you had a nice example of a centered photo gallery on
your site. Would it be OK if I used that for a Concepts page for these
folks.


That's what it is there for. Note however that the demo uses really
illogical/quirky code to get around various browser bugs and
shortcomings. Proper function can easily be messed up when adapting it
to suit your purpose, particularly so if you can't test in IE/win. Make
sure you understand what every bit of code does. To fully test an
adaptation the code would have to be tested in no less than 4 browsers:
IE/win >=5.5, Opera 5 or 6, Opera >=7 and a Gecko based browser.
They seem to have a bunch of neat drawings of projects that were
never taken beyond the concept drawing stage (usually failed financing).
But I thought it might be nice to add a page showing one drawing of each
concept. Your photo gallery struck me as a nice approach
Note that this photo gallery demo specifically addresses one issue:
centered image/caption combos. If centering and captions are not
essential then there is no point in using such a quirky approach.
Happy to give credit and link.


No need.

--
Spartanicus
Nov 4 '05 #7

P: n/a
In article
<fo********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Eric Lindsay <NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
>> Before the closing div of each "box": <div style="clear:both"></div>
>
>I thought that I had tried that, without any success.

Works for me in IE, Opera, Gecko:
http://homepage.ntlworld.ie/spartanicus/trial1.html
What browser(s) are you using to test with?
OK, now I am totally confused. Your example above works with Safari.

However when I use clear:both the boxes fail in Safari, Opera and
Firefox. I can't see how that part of your version is different from
mine, considering there are only the two lines.

http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial5.html
>However I found that using overflow: auto; in the main_box div seemed to
>have the desired result of keeping everything in its boxes.

http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial4.html

Of course these all have the logo up in the top left corner, so maybe I
have some interaction making the thing fall over.
I found a page that claimed this worked with IE 5 and 6 on PC.
If I change your example so that quirks mode is triggered in IE then it
sort of works, but triggering quirks mode does other things to your
example that you don't want to know about :-/


No, I certainly don't want to trigger quirks mode in IE.
I'd rethink the footer design, what you want is possible, but it's a
royal pain in the rear getting it to work in IE and proper browsers. If
you use a 3 column CSS layout template then you still have to sort out
the alignment of the blocks.
I'd sort of like to learn how to do it, even if I don't actually do
anything like that in this design.
The footer works well in Opera & Mozilla, the last address block wraps
to a new line in IE/win. Additionally in IE/win the display of the "tab"
headers is now messed up.
Any improvement in IE, or does that stay broken?

Centered photo gallery demo.
That's what it is there for. Note however that the demo uses really
illogical/quirky code to get around various browser bugs and
shortcomings.
Opps!
Note that this photo gallery demo specifically addresses one issue:
centered image/caption combos. If centering and captions are not
essential then there is no point in using such a quirky approach.


I'll probably give up the idea of using your code, if you see it as
quirky.

I can sure see why people just revert to using tables for layout.

Despite the existing problems, I guess I'll try to style the links next,
as a bunch of horizontal buttons. I've seen some examples using lists,
with those pseudo classes for hover, active and so on. Guess I'll go
find a tutorial on them sometime this weekend.

Thanks for the help.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 4 '05 #8

P: n/a
In article <NO********************************@freenews.iinet .net.au>,
Eric Lindsay <NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
In article
<fo********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Eric Lindsay <NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
> >> Before the closing div of each "box": <div style="clear:both"></div>
> >
> >I thought that I had tried that, without any success.
>
> Works for me in IE, Opera, Gecko:
> http://homepage.ntlworld.ie/spartanicus/trial1.html
> What browser(s) are you using to test with?


OK, now I am totally confused. Your example above works with Safari.


Doh!

I must be going blind. OK, so it isn't enough to have a clear: both
apply to the div you have your image and text in. You also have to have
it enclose another div whose sole purpose is to provide clear:both

OK, obviously it works. By why doesn't clear:both within the existing
div work the way overflow: auto does? I can't understand why I am
having to add content free divs just to get clear: both to work.

This just seems to be heading back to the tag soup approach of most html
pages, but with divs or classes instead of table tags.

Also, if using float is going to be a continued problem when I mostly
want it for positioning images on one side or another, is there some
alternative I should look at?

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 5 '05 #9

P: n/a
In article <NO********************************@freenews.iinet .net.au>,
Eric Lindsay <NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
This just seems to be heading back to the tag soup approach of most html
pages, but with divs or classes instead of table tags.

Also, if using float is going to be a continued problem when I mostly
want it for positioning images on one side or another, is there some
alternative I should look at?


For example, it isn't all that clear to me why doing

<img src="photo.jpg" alt="" class="left">
<img src="photo2.jpg" alt="" class="right">

should be considered all that much better than

<img src="photo.jpg" alt="" align="left">
<img src="photo2.jpg" alt="" align="right">

in terms of separating presentation from content in HTML. At some stage
I still have to decide whether a photo should go on the right side of a
page or the left side, for common size of the page. Yes, I can see a
good argument if all (or even most) of the photos in a div go on one
side or the other. But I don't know. tables are sounding better all the
time.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 5 '05 #10

P: n/a
I found a note about using zoom to keep IE happy under some
circumstances. The same note says all other browsers ignore this as IE
proprietary. This means my CSS gets an error from the CSS validator.
What would people here do? Include zoom, and accept the error message,
or not?

Example here
http://www.architectqueensland.com/trial6.html

I'd imagine the 3 column layout of the address will still break in IE,
but since it may change to 2 column I'm not doing anything about it at
the moment.

I wonder however whether the navigation stuff at the bottom works in
non-Macintosh browsers? Also, should I use border-color to set the
indent and outdent, or should I use indent and outdent? I got the
impression border-color was pretty well supported.

Also, once I am happy with this layout, should I change any use of
border-anything to include all of this in just a border with multiple
settings? I thought I found something about the latter being more
compatible with some browsers than using border-something.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 5 '05 #11

P: n/a
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Eric Lindsay wrote:
For example, it isn't all that clear to me why doing

<img src="photo.jpg" alt="" class="left">
<img src="photo2.jpg" alt="" class="right">

should be considered all that much better than

<img src="photo.jpg" alt="" align="left">
<img src="photo2.jpg" alt="" align="right">

in terms of separating presentation from content in HTML.
Seems a fair comment. As a general rule, it's advisable to choose
class or id names for their structural purpose, rather than for their
presentational intention.

Then there's no clash of logic when you write an alternative
stylesheet for (say) a handheld, with your class=left image displayed
above, and your class=right image displayed below.
At some stage I still have to decide whether a photo should go on
the right side of a page or the left side, for common size of the
page.


Separation of presentation from content still leaves you the freedom
to offer alternative stylesheets for different situations, or to
redesign the presentation of a whole collection of pages without
touching their HTML. Binding the presentation into the HTML forfeits
that flexibility.

Of course in your CSS example the "class" tokens are, in the final
analysis, just meaningless tokens: CSS does not care in the least if
you put class "left" at the upper right and class "right" in the lower
centre: the only semantics of class names are those supplied by the
author.

regards
Nov 5 '05 #12

P: n/a
In article <Pi*****************************@ppepc56.ph.gla.ac .uk>,
"Alan J. Flavell" <fl*****@ph.gla.ac.uk> wrote:
As a general rule, it's advisable to choose
class or id names for their structural purpose, rather than for their
presentational intention.
I've read comments to that effect, and so I've been trying to move away
from using names like left and right (maybe I should use vice and versa?)

The AlertBox usability guy Jakob Nielsen had a book deconstructing home
pages, so I drew myself a diagram of the possible sections of a nominal
three column layout, and picked some div id= names for each, like
document, heading, maintext, sidebar1, sidebar2, logo, footer, navbar,
navbartop, breadcrumbs.

However for some of these at least I'm not sure I shouldn't be using
parts of the HTML structure. For example, div id="document" is
essentially the same thing as <body>, so shouldn't I just define all
general characteristics of the entire <body> rather than make a
container div for all my divs? I thought I had seen cautions against
using body that way, but now I can't find the reasons I went with
document rather than styling body.

I used nav id=footer, but I am wondering whether <address> should be
used to define all or part of the footer?

Likewise, for search engine reasons I would only use a single h1. I
would always put it at the top of the page markup straight after the
body tag, and just before the best descriptive paragraph I can do about
the page. This would be regardless of where h1 ends up appearing, so
putting h1 in div id="heading" seems wrong. But I still feel uneasy
about that, perhaps because of all the magazines where the h1 equivalent
always appears at the very top of the page.
Separation of presentation from content still leaves you the freedom
to offer alternative stylesheets for different situations, or to
redesign the presentation of a whole collection of pages without
touching their HTML. Binding the presentation into the HTML forfeits
that flexibility.


I very much want to reach a degree of ease with using CSS that would let
me take pretty much any HTML page I've done and apply a different
stylesheet. That is why I'm trying for a fairly general page structure
that I can reuse for most pages. I have been very impressed with CSS
Zen Garden, although mostly when I try to use anything similar it just
breaks.

However until I get an html structure that I like and that covers the
vast majority of the pages I do, I can't do much to automate the
production of pages. This means I tend to reuse existing pages, which
in turn means I hardly ever change a stylesheet. I've done maybe three
or four stylesheets in the past seven years. That is the reason I'm
doing some web sites for some neighbours - it seems the only way I will
kick myself into working on new stylesheets.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 5 '05 #13

P: n/a
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:29:11 +1000, Eric Lindsay
<NO**********@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
However for some of these at least I'm not sure I shouldn't be using
parts of the HTML structure. For example, div id="document" is
essentially the same thing as <body>, so shouldn't I just define all
general characteristics of the entire <body> rather than make a
container div for all my divs? I thought I had seen cautions against
using body that way, but now I can't find the reasons I went with
document rather than styling body.


In general you should just style <body>. You can however just
occasionally hit oddities, as I did when producing this page:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/layout5.html
--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/
Nov 6 '05 #14

P: n/a
In article <i5********************************@4ax.com>,
Stephen Poley <sb******************@xs4all.nl> wrote:
In general you should just style <body>. You can however just
occasionally hit oddities, as I did when producing this page:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/layout5.html


I remember seeing that, and the nested divs. It was yet another of the
wonderful examples on the web where I didn't understand why you had to
do that (nor how you ever figured it out in the first place!).

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
Nov 6 '05 #15

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.