- From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:36:30 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
> Ok Orion, here's the css to do it. As a preface, this only works in Moz,
> but then I'd only expect it to. Additionally, the view resized nicely
> until I put your minimum numbers on there. Initially it was completely
> liquid resizing in all instances, with your minimums added it became less
> pretty, but perhaps that could be fixed with a min-margin-left:unit; sort
> of tag added to css. It's actually a cool idea. Here's the code, to do
> what you said couldn't be done. Took me about 45 minutes all told. If I
> could spell "position" it would have taken a LOT less. Keep in mind I've
> added all the bells and whistles here. I'd personally pull all the
> min-whatever attributes out, but you wanted them so they're there. I think
> the system you've described would have the same resize problems that css
> has here, since I still don't see a difference between absolute positions
> and what you're proposing.
I stand corrected.
Here's the code to do it the other way (in the new system):
left {
top: 10px;
left: 10px;
height: 400px + 100%;
width: 200px;
}
midleft {
top: 10px;
left: 210px;
height: 320px + 80%;
width: 200px + 50%;
}
midright {
top: 10px;
left: 420px + 50%;
height: 320px + 80%;
width: 200px + 50%;
}
right {
top: 10px;
left: 430px + 100%;
height: 400px + 100%;
width: 200px;
}
bottom {
top: 340px + 80%;
left: 630px;
height: 70px + 20%
widht: 410px + 100%;
}
It took 3 minutes. It can be automated easily by a WYSIWYG editor
since the code for a layout is obvious (it's deterministic).
The time savings alone should make it worth it. But again I stand
corrected. It was due to the complexity of the CSS code I guess that
made me think it wasn't possible.
Orion Adrian
--
Orion Adrian
Received on Wednesday, 6 July 2005 00:37:06 UTC