Rob Hoopman wrote:
> I've attached a testcase showing this behaviour, should I be filing this
> as a bug or am I overlooking something.
>
I've been at the screen for too long again, there should be one more
"" to properly close all tables in that file.
This does not change the rendering beh
> I've attached a testcase showing this behaviour, should I be filing this
> as a bug or am I overlooking something.
If you want this to get any attention, you'd be far better off:
a) Making sure it has the correct DOCTYPE
b) Making sure it passes the W3C's Validator
c) Filing a bug in Bugzilla
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Hoopman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've been looking at this, glancing at it from the corners of my eyes,
>put it away for a few days, printed it an put it under my pillow at
>night, chanting black/white and other magic at it, stared at it some
>more and fin
Ian Davey wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Hoopman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Have you tried:
>
> td img {vertical-align: bottom}
I have now and this does remove the extra pixels.
Thanks a bundle.
>
> The default is baseline and would explain the extra pixels you are se
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Hoopman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The default is baseline and would explain the extra pixels you are seeing.
>I thought this would not be an issue seeing that the td height attributes
> exactly match the height of the images for that row.
It's an issue bec
