Can this be done?

[Spartanicus]

I am not sure why rf would deserve getting this remark.

None of us know all, some contribute continuous flow of bull shit, and a very
few deserve real credit for their creative and valuable contributions. Most of
us are just human and try our bests participating here.

I think rf is only human, like I am.

Unfortunately rf acts like he's all knowing, when challenged on this
issue his ego got in the way, he threw a hissy fit and stuck his fingers
in his ears in an attempt to hide the fact that he hasn't got any
arguments to back his position up.

His position reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of both html and
css.

 

[Els]

Another test to perform. Thank you Els.

You're welcome, but it isn't the cause ;-)

I fiddled a bit, and I'm almost sure it's caused by the
width:auto and height:auto in the first styles in your
stijlblad.css. I can't explain why, it's probably a
combination with some other style somewhere, but I took
"img," out of that first line in your stylesheet, and after
that couldn't reproduce the problem anymore.

Works on your page 'tekeningen' too.

 

[Nico Schuyt]

Unfortunately rf acts like he's all knowing, when challenged on this
issue his ego got in the way, he threw a hissy fit and stuck his
fingers in his ears in an attempt to hide the fact that he hasn't got
any arguments to back his position up.
His position reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of both html and
css.

Sorry Spartanicus, I disagree with you. In my opinion rf has a great
knowledge of both html and css. His devotion to help people is beyond any
doubt. And in case he makes a mistake, he's fully prepared to admit that
with an "I stand corrected".
Perfect? No. Of great value for this ng: Yes.

 

[Barbara de Zoete]

Barbara de Zoete wrote:

[ weird image bug in IE, that produces all images to have a height of approx
1-2em when page opens, and makes them jump to normal (intended) height when
hovered ]

I fiddled a bit, and I'm almost sure it's caused by the
width:auto and height:auto in the first styles in your
stijlblad.css. I can't explain why, it's probably a
combination with some other style somewhere, but I took
"img," out of that first line in your stylesheet, and after
that couldn't reproduce the problem anymore.

Works on your page 'tekeningen' too.

You did it again! Thank you very much Els. This is like the third time or so,
you find _the_ detail that causes unwanted effects in my pages. I'm in your debt.

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'

 

[Spartanicus]

Sorry Spartanicus, I disagree with you. In my opinion rf has a great
knowledge of both html and css.

See the gory details of his fundamental misunderstanding here:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group..._doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#c86f93e82506182d

This is a real gem (quoting rf):

That is there is nothing different between <span
style="display: table-cell"> and <td>, just as there is nothing different
between <span style="font-size: 2em; font-weight: bolder; display: block;
margin: .67em 0;"> and <h1>.

And in case he makes a mistake, he's fully prepared to admit that
with an "I stand corrected".

Clearly not in this case.

 

[Barbara de Zoete]

Unfortunately rf acts like he's all knowing, when challenged on this
issue his ego got in the way, he threw a hissy fit and stuck his fingers
in his ears in an attempt to hide the fact that he hasn't got any
arguments to back his position up.

His position reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of both html and
css.

Well, what can I say. I can see you don't like what rf produces in these web
authoring groups. Or you just don't like his style.

I think I'll just back out of this and leave the two of you at it. I don't want
to get stuck in the middle. I have no arguments for or against your position or
rf's. I value both of your input and think there is enough room for he two of
you in my newsreader ;-)

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'

 

[Barbara de Zoete]

This is a real gem (quoting rf):

I now remember the feirce argument of november last. And yes, I then thought rf
was getting off on a wrong assumption, being that markup (which has effect on
the DOM) and emulation of the markup with styles (which has no effect on the
DOM) are fundamentally equal (which they are not, most notably).
Indeed in this thread, simulating the table-cell behaviour seems to get confused
with the real stuff (using a <td> inside a <table>) again.

I mistook this for a joke, but appearently it's not.


--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'

 

[Nico Schuyt]

See the gory details of his fundamental misunderstanding here:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group..._doneTitle=Back+to+Search&&d#c86f93e82506182d
This is a real gem (quoting rf):

Just one those discussions between two experts, nothing to be really upset
about

Clearly not in this case.

Nobody's perfect

 

[Els]

Barbara de Zoete wrote:

[ weird image bug in IE, that produces all images to have a
height of approx 1-2em when page opens, and makes them
jump to normal (intended) height when hovered ]

I fiddled a bit, and I'm almost sure it's caused by the
width:auto and height:auto in the first styles in your
stijlblad.css. I can't explain why, it's probably a
combination with some other style somewhere, but I took
"img," out of that first line in your stylesheet, and
after that couldn't reproduce the problem anymore.

Works on your page 'tekeningen' too.

You did it again! Thank you very much Els. This is like the
third time or so, you find _the_ detail that causes
unwanted effects in my pages. I'm in your debt.

You're welcome
(don't talk about debt - we'd all be in everybody's debt in
this ng!)(heb net nog even gecheckt in het doosje stoepkrijt
in de gangkast: je staat er niet in ;-) )

 

[Spartanicus]

I now remember the feirce argument of november last. And yes, I then thought rf
was getting off on a wrong assumption, being that markup (which has effect on
the DOM) and emulation of the markup with styles (which has no effect on the
DOM) are fundamentally equal (which they are not, most notably).

I'm not DOM literate, but the DOM isn't relevant for the distinction
between semantic markup and non semantic markup + css.

 

[jake]

Now I remember why I had you killfiled for a long time.

Really? Well, good for you.

regards.

 

[JDS]

Very nice Toby.
I am surprised to find from my enquiries in several different newsgroups
that there does not seem to be a simple (or even not so simple) CSS
solution to this seemingly simple and straightforward requirement.

Brian Tozer

"enquiries in several different newsgroups"

You're not multi-posting, are you. For shame!