You're apparently new to this whole Internet thing so I'll kindly suggest that you try a different e-mail client.
Ben Rogers http://www.c4.net v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 > -----Original Message----- > From: Ray Champagne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 12:03 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: css - height 100% - i'd like to kill the crack-addicts who > wrote the w3c box model > > Why put scripts in your email? This pops up two blank windows when I read > it....annoying at best dude. > > Ray > > At 11:59 AM 12/21/2004, you wrote: > >Ben Rogers wrote: > > > > >>Well, your problems are manyfold. > > >> > > >>Firstly, you're depending on behaviour that was never mandated in the > > >>specs, that being that a height of 100% means 100% of the available > > >>window area or available area. > > > > > > I don't think he's "depending" on this behavior. He's lamenting the > fact > > > that CSS doesn't support a mechanism for sizing elements relative to > the > > > available space. In HTML all heights and widths are based on the > >available > > > area, not the size of the containing block. > > > >What I meant by depending is that while such behaviour isn't specified > >in the spec, it is available in a fair few browsers in their quirks > >mode, but not in their standards mode. > > > >And thanks for the article below: I didn't know about the 100% height on > >the html element trick. > > > > > I also think he's hoping that someone will prove him wrong. :) > > > >Well, I was trying to show that he was trying to put in a screw with a > >hammer rather than a screwdriver: it might kinda work, but it's not the > >right way, seeing as his problem was really a positioning one rather > >than > > > > >>If IE wasn't so braindead, it'd support fixed positioning. In this > case, > > >>you could position your elements wherever you liked relative to the > four > > >>sides of the screen. This is possible in Firefox, but not in IE, > because > > >>MS have slowly let IE die. > > > > > > Fixed positioning is possible in Internet Explorer. It is even > possible in > > > versions of Internet Explorer which pre-date the Mozilla project. > Again, > > > this is not about positioning, it's about sizing elements. > > > >But what he's trying to do *is* positioning, not sizing. I know he's > >talking about sizing, but what I'm trying to get across is that *his* > >particular problem isn't with sizing, and not with the differences > >between the MS and W3C box models. > > > >And IE doesn't support fixed positioning, nor has it ever done so. Try > >the code below in IE6, Firefox, Opera, and any other browsers you can > >lay your hands on if you don't believe me. > > > > > Also, Microsoft has not let Internet Explorer die. They are going to > tie > > > Internet Explorer upgrades to new releases of the operating system. > > > Personally, I wish they hadn't made this decision, but that's their > > > currently announced intention. > > > >And there only doing that because another strong contender appeared on > >the scene in their primary market. They *had* let it die, but now > >they're resurrecting it. > > > > > However, none of the solutions mentioned in these articles completely > > solves > > > Isaac's problem. In fact, Isaac only got as far as he did because he > mixed > > > html table tags with divs. > > > >And my argument is that he's attacking the problem with the wrong tools. > >Positioning is what he want. It's a pity IE just doesn't support it > >completely enough. > > > >Mind you, there's a set of JavaScript hacks called IE7, which you've > >probably heard of, that fixes a lot of these flaws in IE6. > > > > > However, I was unable to eliminate the vertical scroll bar. I'm not > even > > > quite sure where this is coming from. My guess is it's the window > chrome. > > > >Yup, it's part of the chrome. That, and the padding at the bottom of the > >outermost div is going to trigger it anyway. > > > >Here's that code: > > > ><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" > > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";> > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > > > >Padding! > >I'm here because of fixed positioning! > > > >Using fixed positioning, his problem can be solved as follows: > > > ><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" > > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";> > > > >onTap Framework > >Home > ><http://affiliates.macromedia.com/b.asp?id=2549&p=go/dr_home_aff1> > >[] > > > > > >Hence, my point. > > > >-- > >Keith Gaughan, Developer > >Digital Crew Ltd., Pembroke House, Pembroke Street, Cork, Ireland > >http://digital-crew.com/ > > > > > >-- > >No virus found in this outgoing message. > >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > >Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.2 - Release Date: 20/12/2004 > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:188416 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
