Stylesheets - image problem

Author

image problem

Paul Watt

2006-04-21, 5:52 am

Hi guys,
I've got a problem again, pesky css. I have a rounded box for a login. Its a
wrapper div containing three divs stacked on top of each other. In IE its
fine, but in FF the divs are seperated. I've tried IMG{display:block}, I've
tried IMG{vertical align:bottom}. I've set margins to 0, i've set line
height to 0. Now what?

http://www.paulwatt.info/test/supply/

Cheers

--

Paul Watt
http://www.paulwatt.info

Paul Watt

2006-04-21, 7:17 am

"Paul Watt" <paulioNOSPAM@wattio.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4arnrjFuhbjaU1@individual.net...
> Hi guys,
> I've got a problem again, pesky css. I have a rounded box for a login. Its
> a wrapper div containing three divs stacked on top of each other. In IE
> its fine, but in FF the divs are seperated. I've tried IMG{display:block},
> I've tried IMG{vertical align:bottom}. I've set margins to 0, i've set
> line height to 0. Now what?
>
> http://www.paulwatt.info/test/supply/
>
> Cheers
>

Dont worry, sorted it

cheers

Charles Sweeney

2006-04-21, 7:17 am

Paul Watt wrote

>
> "Paul Watt" <paulioNOSPAM@wattio.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:4arnrjFuhbjaU1@individual.net...
>
> Dont worry, sorted it

That's a relief!

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

Matt Probert

2006-04-21, 7:13 pm

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:44:18 +0100, "Paul Watt"
<paulioNOSPAM@wattio.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>Hi guys,
>I've got a problem again, pesky css. I have a rounded box for a login. Its a
>wrapper div containing three divs stacked on top of each other. In IE its
>fine, but in FF the divs are seperated. I've tried IMG{display:block}, I've
>tried IMG{vertical align:bottom}. I've set margins to 0, i've set line
>height to 0. Now what?
>

Have you tried tables?

</gets coat>

Matt

--
Veritas Vincti
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

Ed Mullen

2006-04-21, 7:13 pm

Paul Watt wrote:
> "Paul Watt" <paulioNOSPAM@wattio.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:4arnrjFuhbjaU1@individual.net...
>
> Dont worry, sorted it
>
> cheers
>
>

Umm, you may have fixed it /somewhere/ but not on the link above. Not
for me in the latest releases of Firefox and SeaMonkey.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
Boycott shampoo! Demand the REAL poo!

Paul Watt

2006-04-21, 7:13 pm

"Ed Mullen" <ed@edmullen.net> wrote in message
news:TfudnS8CJcrbltTZnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@comcast.com...
> Paul Watt wrote:
>
> Umm, you may have fixed it /somewhere/ but not on the link above. Not for
> me in the latest releases of Firefox and SeaMonkey.
>

fixed on my local copy

paul

axlq

2006-04-21, 7:13 pm

In article <44490ac4.6014687@news.ntlworld.com>,
Matt Probert <Via Usenet ONLY> wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:44:18 +0100, "Paul Watt"
><paulioNOSPAM@wattio.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Have you tried tables?
>
></gets coat>

Actually that's a good suggestion. I see more consistency between
browsers in the way they display tables than the way they handle
CSS. It's gotten to the point where I'm about to give up on CSS for
layout, I'm so disgusted with how IE fails to conform to standards,
and I don't want to litter my pages with ridiculous hacks to
compensate for all the differences.

-A

Neredbojias

2006-04-21, 10:59 pm

To further the education of mankind, axlq@spamcop.net (axlq) vouchsafed:

>
> Actually that's a good suggestion. I see more consistency between
> browsers in the way they display tables than the way they handle
> CSS. It's gotten to the point where I'm about to give up on CSS for
> layout, I'm so disgusted with how IE fails to conform to standards,
> and I don't want to litter my pages with ridiculous hacks to
> compensate for all the differences.

Tables can be quite a pain, too. And the standards exist for the primary
reason (-whether the w3c realizes it or not) of making all (general web)
browsers work the same with the same markup. We're parsecs from that
utopean goal which will probably never be reached, but wouldn't it be nice
if you had something like a 98% level of confidence that some splotch of
markup would work identically in all browsers?

Css will evolve. I wouldn't give up too quickly.

--
Neredbojias
Infinity has its limits.

Jim Moe

2006-04-21, 10:59 pm

Paul Watt wrote:

> Dont worry, sorted it
>
Forget the hyphen, yes?

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

Rob_W

2006-04-22, 3:50 am

axlq schreef:
> In article <44490ac4.6014687@news.ntlworld.com>,
> Matt Probert <Via Usenet ONLY> wrote:
[snipped]
>
>
> Actually that's a good suggestion. I see more consistency between
> browsers in the way they display tables than the way they handle
> CSS. It's gotten to the point where I'm about to give up on CSS for
> layout, I'm so disgusted with how IE fails to conform to standards,
> and I don't want to litter my pages with ridiculous hacks to
> compensate for all the differences.
>
> -A

If you have to apply hacks, it will be in the stylesheet.
That means you don't have to litter your pages.

Rob

axlq

2006-04-22, 7:02 pm

In article <4449b682$0$31646$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
Rob_W <robwaaijenberg@hotmail.com> wrote:
>axlq schreef:
>
>If you have to apply hacks, it will be in the stylesheet.
>That means you don't have to litter your pages.

That's not quite true. Try making a CSS-only drop-down menu
(without using Javascript) that works the same under IE and other
browsers. All the examples I have seen required conditional markup
hacks in the document, as well as separate stylesheets for IE.

An excellent example of a cross-browser non-javascript CSS-only
drop-down menu is here:
http://www.cssplay.co.uk/menus/final_drop.html

It's quite nicely done, but it does require hacks in both CSS and
HTML.

-A

kchayka

2006-04-23, 6:59 pm

axlq wrote:
> In article <4449b682$0$31646$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
> Rob_W <robwaaijenberg@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> That's not quite true. Try making a CSS-only drop-down menu

And why would I even want to? Those things are a PITA to use - I
wouldn't want any of my users to suffer with them.

BTW, contrary to popular belief, making them with CSS instead of JS does
*not* automatically make them more accessible.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

Warren Sarle

2006-04-24, 6:54 pm

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:44:18 +0100, "Paul Watt"
<paulioNOSPAM@wattio.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> I've got a problem again, pesky css. I have a rounded box for a login. Its a
> wrapper div containing three divs stacked on top of each other. In IE its
> fine, but in FF the divs are seperated. I've tried IMG{display:block}, I've
> tried IMG{vertical align:bottom}. I've set margins to 0, i've set line
> height to 0. Now what?

I've just encountered a similar problem. What seems to be working is
eliminating all white space, including line breaks, between elements.
Otherwise, I get extra vertical space in Firefox and extra horizontal
space in Opera.

It would be nice if there were a white-space option to delete
white-space, so code like this code be formatted in a more readable
way.

--

Warren S. Sarle SAS Institute Inc. The opinions expressed here
saswss@unx.sas.com SAS Campus Drive are mine and not necessarily
(919) 677-8000 Cary, NC 27513, USA those of SAS Institute.

Neredbojias

2006-04-24, 6:54 pm

To further the education of mankind, saswss@unx.sas.com (Warren Sarle)
vouchsafed:

> I've just encountered a similar problem. What seems to be working is
> eliminating all white space, including line breaks, between elements.
> Otherwise, I get extra vertical space in Firefox and extra horizontal
> space in Opera.
>
> It would be nice if there were a white-space option to delete
> white-space, so code like this code be formatted in a more readable
> way.

Yes, and I'd just like to add that Gecko seems to be pretty "lousy" in the
whitespace arena.

--
Neredbojias
Infinity has its limits.

kchayka

2006-04-24, 11:16 pm

Warren Sarle wrote:
>
> What seems to be working is
> eliminating all white space, including line breaks, between elements.
> Otherwise, I get extra vertical space in Firefox and extra horizontal
> space in Opera.

It is very possible that white space isn't the problem at all, but
simple margins. You may be assuming the element that appears to have
excess margins is the cause. Often, it is some other block near it instead.

This is no doubt true in the OP's case. He appears to think the img
element or its div container is the source of the gaps, when it is far
more likely the form and/or its paragraph elements are.

> It would be nice if there were a white-space option to delete
> white-space, so code like this code be formatted in a more readable
> way.

FWIW, the only time I ever have trouble with white space is with WinIE
and list markup, notably with navigation menus. Gecko never gives me
trouble.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

Warren Sarle

2006-04-26, 3:50 am

"kchayka" <usenet@c-net.us> wrote in message
news:4b564aFvvl0eU1@individual.net...
> Warren Sarle wrote:
>
> It is very possible that white space isn't the problem at all, but
> simple margins. You may be assuming the element that appears to have
> excess margins is the cause. Often, it is some other block near it
> instead.
>
> This is no doubt true in the OP's case. He appears to think the img
> element or its div container is the source of the gaps, when it is far
> more likely the form and/or its paragraph elements are.

In my particular case, that is not possible, since all the relevant margins
are explicitly set to zero, and the only elements involved are images
and divs.

> FWIW, the only time I ever have trouble with white space is with WinIE
> and list markup, notably with navigation menus. Gecko never gives me
> trouble.

Gecko creates useless DOM text nodes whenever there is nothing but
white space between two div elements. IE omits the useless text nodes.
I don't know whether this is covered by the standards, but I certainly
find IE's behavior to make more sense in this case.

Neredbojias

2006-04-26, 3:50 am

To further the education of mankind, "Warren Sarle" <saswss@unx.sas.com>
vouchsafed:

>
> Gecko creates useless DOM text nodes whenever there is nothing but
> white space between two div elements. IE omits the useless text nodes.
> I don't know whether this is covered by the standards, but I certainly
> find IE's behavior to make more sense in this case.

Ah ha! I _knew_ there was a worm in the snifter somewhere.

What is the big problem with browsers doing what they're suppose to, namely
make white space transparent? I wouldn't think it was that high of a
mountain to climb.

--
Neredbojias
Infinity has its limits.