On 3/4/07, Chris Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >The modern way to do this, since a menu (even a horizontal one) is
> >just a list of links, is to use the UL element as the wrapper. The
> >anchors then go in the LI elements within. See for example the> >Listamatic
> >site at http://css.maxdes
Chris Chen wrote:
>> [snip] There are prettier ways to do it
>> too, if you're worried about your source looking nice. One way that I
>> use is:
>>
>>FooBar
>
> That's neat. Could you advise why this comment trick work, and how
> widely does it work across browsers?
Don't know about that,
> That's neat. Could you advise why this comment trick work, and how widely
> does it work across browsers?
It should work in all browsers. As for how it works, you know how if
you have something like:
Foo
Bar
in your HTML, it will render as Foo Bar, and not FooBar? It reduces
multi
[snip] There are prettier ways to do it
too, if you're worried about your source looking nice. One way that I use
is:
FooBar
That's neat. Could you advise why this comment trick work, and how widely
does it work across browsers?
Thanks,
Chris
__
>There's nothing ugly at all about making anchors display as blocks.
>Changing an element's display type is no worse than changing its font
>or borders. Remember, (x)HTML is for describing the content, and CSS
>is for presenting it. If it's a link, it should be marked up as a
>link, not as a div
> The ugly part is to force to a block. I might as well replace with a
> truely block element and change to use scripting to handle the visual cue
> change / click, but that would seem overkill for a simple task like this. Is
> there a strong opposition to to the way I use above for this task?
> One caveat is that inlined
> introduced an unknown fixed padding that I have to compensate for via
> experiment (since I need to center the list in the middle). This is IE7.
I'm pretty sure what you're seeing is actually a space (as in space bar).
Foo
Bar
IE renders the new line characters be
The modern way to do this, since a menu (even a horizontal one) is
just a list of links, is to use the UL element as the wrapper. The
anchors then go in the LI elements within. See for example the
Listamatic site at http://css.maxdesign.com.au/listamatic/
COOL! I am happily switching + inline
On 3/4/07, Chris Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Whatever reason is the span there for? There's nothing you can do with
> >that construction that you can't do with just the link.
>
> This is for a horizontal navigation bar centered on the top of the page.
The modern way to do this, since a
I just realized I only need one level of here to achieve what I want.
Chris
> > Whatever reason is the span there for? There's nothing you can do
with
>that
> > construction that you can't do with just the link.
This is for a horizontal navigation bar centered on the top of the page.
> >
>
> > Whatever reason is the span there for? There's nothing you can do with
>that
> > construction that you can't do with just the link.
This is for a horizontal navigation bar centered on the top of the page.
> >
>To add to that, if you want to adjust the vertical alignment within a block
>of
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 15:03:01 -0800, Chris Chen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I can't seem to be able to style inside to make it centered
> *vertically*
> inside .
>
> http://www.msn.com"; >Hello
>
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 12:31:04 -0800, Ed Seehouse replied:
> Whatever reason is the span there for? There's nothi
On 3/2/07, Chris Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't seem to be able to style inside to make it centered
> *vertically* inside .
Both of these elements are inline so the only things you can adjust
are the line height and the font size. If you must for some reason
adjust them vertically t
Hi,
I can't seem to be able to style inside to make it centered
*vertically* inside .
http://www.msn.com"; >Hello
Is there a general CSS solution for this (other than "position:
relative/absolute") that works on other elements as well?
Thanks,
Chris
_
14 matches
Mail list logo