why won't it work?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by richard, Jan 5, 2010.

  1. richard

    richard Guest

    I get the same results in IE7 and FF3.5.
    The two inner divisions will not show entirely in the container for nuthin.
    This did not used to be such a pain. I'm wondering if the browser writers
    have changed the behavior of css.




    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

    <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

    <head>
    <title></title>
    </head>

    <body>

    <div style="border:solid 2px #f00; padding:10px;">
    <div style="float:left; border:solid 2px #0f0; padding:10px">
    123
    </div>

    <div style="float:left; border:solid 2px #0f0; padding:10px">
    abc
    </div>
    </div>


    </body>

    </html>
    richard, Jan 5, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <sjl0rt5u2ei7.tiuvimkqbny8$>,
    richard <> wrote:

    > I get the same results in IE7 and FF3.5.
    > The two inner divisions will not show entirely in the container for nuthin.
    > This did not used to be such a pain. I'm wondering if the browser writers
    > have changed the behavior of css.
    >
    >

    Not that you bother to answer any advice I give you, but try overflow:
    hidden; on your container. Are you perhaps interested to know why you
    are having this trouble rather than this or that fix?

    I am in a bad mood it seems!

    >
    > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
    > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
    >
    > <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    >
    > <head>
    > <title></title>
    > </head>
    >
    > <body>
    >
    > <div style="border:solid 2px #f00; padding:10px;">
    > <div style="float:left; border:solid 2px #0f0; padding:10px">
    > 123
    > </div>
    >
    > <div style="float:left; border:solid 2px #0f0; padding:10px">
    > abc
    > </div>
    > </div>
    >
    >
    > </body>
    >
    > </html>


    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jan 5, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. richard

    richard Guest

    On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:51:34 +1100, dorayme wrote:

    > In article <sjl0rt5u2ei7.tiuvimkqbny8$>,
    > richard <> wrote:
    >
    >> I get the same results in IE7 and FF3.5.
    >> The two inner divisions will not show entirely in the container for nuthin.
    >> This did not used to be such a pain. I'm wondering if the browser writers
    >> have changed the behavior of css.
    >>
    >>

    > Not that you bother to answer any advice I give you, but try overflow:
    > hidden; on your container. Are you perhaps interested to know why you
    > are having this trouble rather than this or that fix?
    >
    > I am in a bad mood it seems!
    >


    Me two. I just get so frustrated sometimes I can't seem to recall simple
    fixes.
    Thanks for the kick.
    richard, Jan 5, 2010
    #3
  4. richard

    rf Guest

    "richard" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:s57bkcm1x3x$.q3d4gdlsptxe$...
    > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:51:34 +1100, dorayme wrote:
    >
    >> In article <sjl0rt5u2ei7.tiuvimkqbny8$>,
    >> richard <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> I get the same results in IE7 and FF3.5.
    >>> The two inner divisions will not show entirely in the container for
    >>> nuthin.
    >>> This did not used to be such a pain. I'm wondering if the browser
    >>> writers
    >>> have changed the behavior of css.


    No, they have not.

    >> Not that you bother to answer any advice I give you, but try overflow:
    >> hidden; on your container. Are you perhaps interested to know why you
    >> are having this trouble rather than this or that fix?


    You forgot to ask dorayme why you are having this trouble so she could point
    you to her rather excellent series of articles on the matter.

    >> I am in a bad mood it seems!


    Easy for this to happen with RtS.

    > Me two.


    You two, or you three?

    > I just get so frustrated sometimes I can't seem to recall simple
    > fixes.


    You don't *need* "simple fixes" if you truly understood what float really
    does.
    rf, Jan 5, 2010
    #4
  5. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <qiB0n.66943$>,
    "rf" <> wrote:

    > "richard" <> wrote in message
    > news:eek:s57bkcm1x3x$.q3d4gdlsptxe$...
    > > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:51:34 +1100, dorayme wrote:


    > >> I am in a bad mood it seems!

    >
    > Easy for this to happen with RtS.
    >
    > > Me two.

    >
    > You two, or you three?
    >


    I am in a better mood now that I have had a drink! Richard Newsguy has
    driven me to it. Let's all of us start a *barn* dance? We will float
    around the ballroom and not worry about overflows, the more the
    merrier... <g>

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jan 5, 2010
    #5
  6. richard

    rf Guest

    "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <qiB0n.66943$>,
    > "rf" <> wrote:
    >
    >> "richard" <> wrote in message
    >> news:eek:s57bkcm1x3x$.q3d4gdlsptxe$...
    >> > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:51:34 +1100, dorayme wrote:

    >
    >> >> I am in a bad mood it seems!

    >>
    >> Easy for this to happen with RtS.
    >>
    >> > Me two.

    >>
    >> You two, or you three?
    >>

    >
    > I am in a better mood now that I have had a drink! Richard Newsguy has
    > driven me to it. Let's all of us start a *barn* dance? We will float
    > around the ballroom and not worry about overflows, the more the
    > merrier... <g>


    Nah. I don't dance, well not when I am sober anyway. I'll just accompany you
    over to the scrollbar for another G&T.
    rf, Jan 5, 2010
    #6
  7. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed asdf <> writing
    in news::

    > dorayme wrote:
    >> In article <qiB0n.66943$>,
    >> "rf" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> "richard" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:eek:s57bkcm1x3x$.q3d4gdlsptxe$...
    >>>> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:51:34 +1100, dorayme wrote:

    >>
    >>>>> I am in a bad mood it seems!
    >>> Easy for this to happen with RtS.
    >>>
    >>>> Me two.
    >>> You two, or you three?
    >>>

    >>
    >> I am in a better mood now that I have had a drink! Richard Newsguy

    has
    >> driven me to it. Let's all of us start a *barn* dance? We will float
    >> around the ballroom and not worry about overflows, the more the
    >> merrier... <g>
    >>

    >
    > I hear ya, dorayme...
    >
    > Is it ok to dance with one's own mum? :)
    >


    I hope so, my son and I were in the kitchen dancing to Walking After
    Midnight by Patsy Kline last night. It's not easy dancing with a six
    year old.


    --
    Adrienne Boswell at Home
    Arbpen Web Site Design Services
    http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
    Please respond to the group so others can share
    Adrienne Boswell, Jan 5, 2010
    #7
  8. richard

    richard Guest

    On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:30:22 +1100, dorayme wrote:

    > In article <qiB0n.66943$>,
    > "rf" <> wrote:
    >
    >> "richard" <> wrote in message
    >> news:eek:s57bkcm1x3x$.q3d4gdlsptxe$...
    >>> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:51:34 +1100, dorayme wrote:

    >
    >>>> I am in a bad mood it seems!

    >>
    >> Easy for this to happen with RtS.
    >>
    >>> Me two.

    >>
    >> You two, or you three?
    >>

    >
    > I am in a better mood now that I have had a drink! Richard Newsguy has
    > driven me to it. Let's all of us start a *barn* dance? We will float
    > around the ballroom and not worry about overflows, the more the
    > merrier... <g>


    As long as you are nekkid and do a pole dance for us.
    richard, Jan 5, 2010
    #8
  9. richard

    richard Guest

    On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 06:49:58 GMT, rf wrote:

    > "richard" <> wrote in message
    > news:eek:s57bkcm1x3x$.q3d4gdlsptxe$...
    >> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:51:34 +1100, dorayme wrote:
    >>
    >>> In article <sjl0rt5u2ei7.tiuvimkqbny8$>,
    >>> richard <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I get the same results in IE7 and FF3.5.
    >>>> The two inner divisions will not show entirely in the container for
    >>>> nuthin.
    >>>> This did not used to be such a pain. I'm wondering if the browser
    >>>> writers
    >>>> have changed the behavior of css.

    >
    > No, they have not.
    >
    >>> Not that you bother to answer any advice I give you, but try overflow:
    >>> hidden; on your container. Are you perhaps interested to know why you
    >>> are having this trouble rather than this or that fix?

    >
    > You forgot to ask dorayme why you are having this trouble so she could point
    > you to her rather excellent series of articles on the matter.
    >
    >>> I am in a bad mood it seems!

    >
    > Easy for this to happen with RtS.
    >
    >> Me two.

    >
    > You two, or you three?
    >
    >> I just get so frustrated sometimes I can't seem to recall simple
    >> fixes.

    >
    > You don't *need* "simple fixes" if you truly understood what float really
    > does.


    Always so easy to attach those stereotyped monikers ain't it?
    Like you're do damned perfect 100% of the time you don't require any
    assistance for nuthin.
    richard, Jan 5, 2010
    #9
  10. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <Xns9CF748726B237arbpenyahoocom@85.214.113.135>,
    Adrienne Boswell <> wrote:

    > It's not easy dancing with a six
    > year old.


    Just don't let them make like they are two years old and leap up on you
    in their dancing excitement, they are bad enough when they are two on
    the parental spine! <g>

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jan 5, 2010
    #10
  11. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    richard <> wrote:

    > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 06:49:58 GMT, rf wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > You don't *need* "simple fixes" if you truly understood what float really
    > > does.

    >
    > Always so easy to attach those stereotyped monikers ain't it?
    > Like you're do damned perfect 100% of the time you don't require any
    > assistance for nuthin.


    rf was saying that it is better to get a more comprehensive view of the
    float rules than just be advised about one fix in one particular
    situation. I don't think you realise how much he loves you. He is just
    shy and this is his way.

    By the way, that overflow rule I mentioned will fail in IE6 in
    situations where the container needs to grow height. Check your's out.
    If in IE6 the container does grow height and enclose its children in the
    way you want, it is not the overflow rule causing it. If it is not
    enclosing its floated children, there are fixes for this. Sometimes one
    of the simplest is to give the container an explicit width. Other fixes
    include putting a non-floated child cleared to below the floats...

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jan 5, 2010
    #11
  12. richard

    richard Guest

    On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:22:47 +1100, dorayme wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > richard <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 06:49:58 GMT, rf wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> You don't *need* "simple fixes" if you truly understood what float really
    >>> does.

    >>
    >> Always so easy to attach those stereotyped monikers ain't it?
    >> Like you're do damned perfect 100% of the time you don't require any
    >> assistance for nuthin.

    >
    > rf was saying that it is better to get a more comprehensive view of the
    > float rules than just be advised about one fix in one particular
    > situation. I don't think you realise how much he loves you. He is just
    > shy and this is his way.
    >
    > By the way, that overflow rule I mentioned will fail in IE6 in
    > situations where the container needs to grow height. Check your's out.
    > If in IE6 the container does grow height and enclose its children in the
    > way you want, it is not the overflow rule causing it. If it is not
    > enclosing its floated children, there are fixes for this. Sometimes one
    > of the simplest is to give the container an explicit width. Other fixes
    > include putting a non-floated child cleared to below the floats...


    Thanks.
    In my actual output, I have an <hr> to clear the floats with.
    I figure every browser should know how to handle one of them.
    I also have the floated divisions using display:block as well as a fixed
    width.
    richard, Jan 5, 2010
    #12
  13. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    richard <> wrote:

    > On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:22:47 +1100, dorayme wrote:
    >
    > > In article <>,
    > > richard <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 06:49:58 GMT, rf wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>
    > >>> You don't *need* "simple fixes" if you truly understood what float really
    > >>> does.
    > >>
    > >> Always so easy to attach those stereotyped monikers ain't it?
    > >> Like you're do damned perfect 100% of the time you don't require any
    > >> assistance for nuthin.

    > >
    > > rf was saying that it is better to get a more comprehensive view of the
    > > float rules than just be advised about one fix in one particular
    > > situation. I don't think you realise how much he loves you. He is just
    > > shy and this is his way.
    > >
    > > By the way, that overflow rule I mentioned will fail in IE6 in
    > > situations where the container needs to grow height. Check your's out.
    > > If in IE6 the container does grow height and enclose its children in the
    > > way you want, it is not the overflow rule causing it. If it is not
    > > enclosing its floated children, there are fixes for this. Sometimes one
    > > of the simplest is to give the container an explicit width. Other fixes
    > > include putting a non-floated child cleared to below the floats...

    >
    > Thanks.
    > In my actual output, I have an <hr> to clear the floats with.
    > I figure every browser should know how to handle one of them.
    > I also have the floated divisions using display:block as well as a fixed
    > width.


    Perhaps you might have shown the relevant bits in your posted code. If
    you had a cleared non-float child in the first place, you might not have
    needed the overflow rule on the container? I am not meaning to suggest -
    God forbid! - that you should actually post any URL. Let's not go
    overboard now! <g>

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jan 5, 2010
    #13
  14. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed dorayme
    <> writing in news:doraymeRidThis-
    :

    > In article <Xns9CF748726B237arbpenyahoocom@85.214.113.135>,
    > Adrienne Boswell <> wrote:
    >
    >> It's not easy dancing with a six
    >> year old.

    >
    > Just don't let them make like they are two years old and leap up on you
    > in their dancing excitement, they are bad enough when they are two on
    > the parental spine! <g>
    >


    Are you kidding!? I had to carry Spane to bed the other night when he fell
    asleep in the chair, 49 pounds (22kg) dead weight. Talk about a parental
    spine!

    --
    Adrienne Boswell at Home
    Arbpen Web Site Design Services
    http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
    Please respond to the group so others can share
    Adrienne Boswell, Jan 6, 2010
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tim T

    do you know why this won't work?

    Tim T, Nov 11, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,461
    Tim T
    Nov 12, 2003
  2. Marina

    Re: WHY, WHY WON'T IT WORK???

    Marina, Jun 29, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    342
    Marina
    Jun 29, 2004
  3. Chad
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    8,308
  4. Mr. SweatyFinger

    why why why why why

    Mr. SweatyFinger, Nov 28, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    855
    Mark Rae
    Dec 21, 2006
  5. Mr. SweatyFinger
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,747
    Smokey Grindel
    Dec 2, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page