> You can always stiffen up the table by adding...
>
> table.main {width: 890px;}
> * html table.main {width: 910px;}
...
> table.main {table-layout: fixed;}
Well, of course it works, so I must say you're a total genius. :)
I gave up and went to bed when I posted, but I did suspect that forcing
a fixed table width would solve the problem. What threw me off is the
fact that I had to click *twice* before those links would work. I was
affraid that even if I fixed the width, I would still have to click
twice. But now that I've tried it I see this is not the case. I am
relieved, but still curious. Can you think why this might be?
Also, I tried each of those styles individually and only
table.main {width: 890px;}
actually works. Should I leave the others in there for good measure, do
you think? Or is this just creating unnecessary clutter?
Lastly, how did you decide on the values you used -- 890 & 910 ? I know
I was aiming for a width of 900, but do you have a tool that will
calculate widths for you? Or were you doing it in your head?
> BTW: I think you should write proper HTML comments, if only to avoid
> those cascading error-messages...
>
Good idea! I know that dreamweaver has been complaining, but now that
I've heard it from a human, I've gone and read about it. I'll start
making my lines out of =====.
My sincerest thanks for helping me both with my layout AND my coding
style! And, btw, that's a healthy looking cow you've got there. Wish we
had more like that in this country!
jo5h
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
