- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 09:23:36 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, 15 Jun 1999 14:24:27 +0200 (MET DST), Nicolas Lesbats (nlesbats@etu.utc.fr) wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jun 1999, Peter Linss wrote: > | No, it's not correct, the 'display:none' will cause the head and all of its > | children to not display. > > Oops... So I could have written : > > head { display: block; visibility: hidden } > link(...) { display: table-cell; visibility: visible } Probably you're still better off using display, since elements with visibility: hidden can take up space: head { display: block } head > * { display: none } head > link { display: table-cell } > | Set the <head> to 'display: table-row' if you want each link in a cell in the > | same row. Otherwise you can set the <head> to 'display:table' but each link > | will be in its own row. Actually the adjacent table-cell elements should end up in the same row in either case. If you want each link in its own row, you would need display: table-row on the link elements. See [1]. (But how do these rules interact with display: none on siblings between table-cells??) David [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/tables.html#anonymous-boxes L. David Baron Rising Sophomore, Harvard dbaron@fas.harvard.edu Links, SatPix, CSS, etc. < http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/ > WSP CSS AC < http://www.webstandards.org/css/ >
Received on Tuesday, 15 June 1999 09:23:38 UTC