Re: div tag help
- From: Neredbojias <monstersquasher@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 26 Sep 2007 06:37:08 GMT
Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:59:43
GMT rf scribed:
How do I get two div sections to sit next to each other
horizontally?
I subscribe to Andy's well-presented opinion on the matter. However,
divs don't go "all the way to the bottom of the page" if the content
is insufficient unless the author does something which is usually
wrong. That's a fact to bear in mind particularly when considering
backgrounds.
Further, what exactly is the "page"?
Usually, with a really simple HTML file, it is the end of that HTML
file. The bottom of the "content". Where the browser stops scrolling
when one leans on ones page down button, because said browser can't go
down any more. There is nothing further. Therebelow lie dragons.
However if one distrupts the usual content flow by introducing floated
elements or <shudder> absolutely positioned elements </shudder> then
one totally loses the concept of the "page".
Where is the bottom of the "page" for a floated element? The bottom of
the element? The bottom of the surrounding content?
Where is the bottom of the "page" for an absolutely positioned div
element?
Where is the bottom of the "page" for an absolutely positioned div
element where top: 1000px; has been specified? (try it and see, you
will need to scroll down). Indeed if that element is the only one in
the body of the HTML file where is the "top" of the "page"? Pixel 0 or
pixel 1000?
Hint: We don't actually know.
The best we can guess is that, after the browser has done its best to
lay out the content, after due consideration to these floated and
positioned elements, the bottom of the page is where there is nothing
more. That is, the browser does not need to draw anything below this
point. You have reached the end of the scroll bar. And no, there is no
CSS property to position something at the end of the scroll bar, least
of all the bottom of an element :-)
In any case HTML files do not describe "pages". They describe content,
with CSS to pretty that content. The browser lays out the elements
containing the content as it sees fit, with the CSS taken into
account. Why should we ask more? "Page" is for print, not web.
Ah, but I see I have just upset a considerable number of graphic
artists who think they are web drezigners ;-)
Yeah, I agree. Page is at most an inexact concept when it comes to The
Web. What you really have is a "set of content" which may contain
subsets and elements therein. How these elements relate to one another
in a visual and particularly semantic fashion for the non-visual
interpreter is what web page design is about, not the physically-limited
methods typically applied to print. That's why "fixed" web design stands
out as being poor while a smoothly-flowing, adeptly-integrated page seems
so intrinsically "right" and attractive.
So-called designers who brag about the looks of their static page are
really just saying that one frame in a movie appears nicely rendered.
The rest of the movie sucks, but that isn't their worry because they are
too dense to understand it.
--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: div tag help
- From: Sems
- Re: div tag help
- References:
- div tag help
- From: ben_cameron00
- Re: div tag help
- From: Neredbojias
- Re: div tag help
- From: rf
- div tag help
- Prev by Date: Re: What does your implementation process look like?
- Next by Date: Re: What does your implementation process look like?
- Previous by thread: Re: div tag help
- Next by thread: Re: div tag help
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
