Scott Sauyet wrote: > Interesting, and quite simple. Any ideas on *why* hasLayout on the > link affects the position of an element some distance away?
The 'hasLayout' team's collective set of ideas can be found here... <http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/onhavinglayout.html> The main effect is that 'hasLayout' stiffen up and straighten out, and also _isolates_ an element from its surroundings. In so doing the edges of each element becomes much better defined and clear-cut, and thereby also the effects elements have on each others in IE/win -- including margins, offsets and positioning. May I add that 'hasLayout' is a "constructed bug", a kludge, implemented in IE/win to counteract the worst effects of a huge number of real "calculation bugs" in the old Trident engine. As such 'hasLayout' can easily do as much damage to a layout as it can do good, and should only be used when there are few or no other options, and only when one can perform thorough testing to avoid negative side-effects. There are of course also cases where 'hasLayout' simply can not be avoided even if it causes damage, since there are so many potential triggers - as the 'hasLayout' article clearly shows. This is when designing in IE/win can become really problematic. > I just love IE! Strange love ;-) regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ______________________________________________________________________ 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/
