W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2002

Re: CSS, css, etc. [css layout should be symmetrical]

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:38:18 +0000
Message-ID: <3C75227A.1040502@hixie.ch>
To: Vadim Plessky <lucy-ples@mtu-net.ru>
CC: www-style@w3.org
Vadim Plessky wrote:
> So, what's your proposal?
> Skip CSS and go back to HTML 4.0?

No, my proposal is to use CSS1 now, CSS2 when it is implemented, and so forth.


>|> But I did some research in that direction - and it shows that neither
>|> Mozilla nor MS IE can render CSS2 'table-*' properties. Konqueror
>|> handles it much better but still fails on some tetss.
>|
>| That is incorrect.
 >
> well, take my example below and enjoy.
> I had a lot of fun developing this example, and testing it in different 
> browsers.

Problem number 1: Your markup is invalid.

Problem number 2: Having corrected your markup, I found that your CSS rules had 
display:block set after display:table-*, causing your table-related markup to be 
ignored:

> .realtd 	{
> /* "realtd" has { display: table-cell } definition, while
>     "pseudotd" - display : block;
>  */
> 	display : table-cell;

                   ^^^^^^^^^^

>  	font-family: "Arial", "Helvetica", "Geneva", sans-serif;
> 	font-size: 16pt;
>  	font-weight : bold;
>  	display : block;

                   ^^^^^

>  	margin: 5px;
> 	border: 4px solid lime;
>  	padding: 5px;
>  	text-align: center;
>  	vertical-align: middle;
>  	}

Having fixed this error, the page renderered as expected in Mozilla.

I am surprised that you say it worked as you expected in Konqueror, if it did 
then that is an error. When I tried it, Konqueror locked up.


> Does XHTML explains how you should render this:

XHTML doesn't explain how anything should be rendered. That's the realm of CSS.


> BTW: I like MS IE solution when it renders XML with unknown DTD as a DOM 
> tree, that's it. But MS IE will render XHTML treating it as HTML.
> You will not get "XHTML parsing error" on not well-formed XHTML.
> But you will get error on bad XML.
> 
> So I do no think your last statement was correct for 100%.
> There are some differences in XHTML and *pure XML*,at least with rendering in 
> modern browsers.

If what you say is true, then it is a (rather serious) bug in IE. It does not 
affect the validity of my statement, however.

-- 
Ian Hickson
``The inability of a user agent to implement part of this specification due to
the limitations of a particular device (e.g., non interactive user agents will
probably not implement dynamic pseudo-classes because they make no sense
without interactivity) does not imply non-conformance.'' -- Selectors, Sec13
Received on Thursday, 21 February 2002 11:38:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:13 GMT