- 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