- From: Brian V Bonini <b-bonini@cox.net>
- Date: 26 Jun 2003 14:13:06 -0400
- To: www-html@w3.org
On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 04:18, Asbjørn Ulsberg wrote: > Brian V Bonini wrote: > > > #lines { display: block; } > > > > <div id="lines"><img src="xxx" /><img src="xxx" /> > > <img src="xxx" /></div> > > <div> is a block element by default, so your CSS does nothing > with the above HTML code. If you want the images inside the > <div> to be block elements, you should write: > > /* display all descendant images of #lines as block > elements */ > #lines img { > display: block; > } > > or > > /* display all images that are directly children of #lines > as block elements */ > #lines>img { > display: block; > } > > > in this scenario is display: block saying to display div > > id=lines as a block level element > > Yes. > > > or to display the contents of div id=lines in this case img > > as block level elements. > > No. You have the "id" attribute on the <div>, and then the id > selector (#lines) style this one directly. > > > but is this the correct usage? > > If you want to display the images inline, and the <div> as a > block, you don't have to do anything in CSS at all, because > this is their default appearance. That being the case why does the CSS 2 recommendation cite examples of the display property such as p {display: block}, is this not as redundant as div {display: block} and at the very least confusing?
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2003 14:08:44 UTC