- From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 12:07:53 -0700
- To: "'Sue Jordan'" <sjacct@worldnet.att.net>, www-style@w3.org
And, in fact, 'static' and 'fixed' are completely different in intent. (BTW, Claus, people at Microsoft helped *write* the spec.) -Chris Wilson > -----Original Message----- > From: Sue Jordan [SMTP:sjacct@worldnet.att.net] > Sent: Sunday, August 23, 1998 5:03 PM > To: www-style@w3.org > Subject: Re: position:fixed ? > > Claus André Färber wrote: > > > > Sue Jordan <sjacct@worldnet.att.net> schrieb: > > > > I used 'position: fixed'... Do NS4 and IE4 support this thing. > > > > > > IE4 supports static, relative and absolute attribute values of the > > > 'position' property, according to: > > > > Too bad noone as Microsoft was able to read the spec and find out that > > it is not spelled "static", but "fixed". This means that IE4 does not > > support fixed position (yet), period. > > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.html#propdef-position > > 'position' > Value: > static | relative | absolute | fixed | inherit > > Er...I think it's spelled both ways, which is a Good Thing, because the > values are not identical. > > Sue
Received on Monday, 24 August 1998 15:07:37 UTC