[email protected] wrote: > <http://www.maireadnesbitt.com/CSSversion.html>
Your understanding of proportional image-scaling is correct, and that part of your final looks ok in all good browsers. Note that I declared the 'max-width:' quite small (80%) because you have margins, paddings and border-width in pixels, and these fixed values are added to the images' width/max-width. So, with a larger 'max-width: 90%' you'll have to make sure the images with margins, paddings and borders don't overflow and create problems on narrow windows. Note also that IE6 (and older) doesn't play along since it doesn't support max-width and is horrible at image-scaling anyway, so you'll have to provide alternative solutions for that old bugger if you aim to support it. > But pray tell, how on earth (where) could I have learned that without > your help? At the source... <http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/#specs> ...and all one needs to do is to check what various browsers make out of the spec-parts we need, like so... <http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/moa_19c.html> <http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_23.html> Browsers are definitely getting better. 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/
