|
|
Posted by dorayme on 10/22/06 20:26
In article <slrnejmjj5.21i.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
> On 2006-10-22, dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > In article <57af7$453aecef$40cba7ac$13039@NAXS.COM>,
> > "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@centralva.net> wrote:
> [snip]
> >> It's correct, the DIV with the short caption is not as tall so can
> >> "catch" the next floated DIV. If you wish for all to stack nicely and
> >> evenly set all the DIVs to the same height. Pick a value that will
> >> accommodate your longest caption and the DIVs will fall on a grid.
> >
> > Yes, I am sure it is correct as it behaves thus in all my
> > browsers. And I sort of use your sort of explanations to explain
> > it to myself (even to the extent of using the phrase "catching")
> > and yet I am still a tad puzzled. Perhaps I have some distracting
> > models or inappropriate ones like that floats are a bit like text
> > that wraps naturally,
>
> I think that is still a good mental model. The difference is, as you see
> with this example, when floats have different heights. For inline boxes,
> the line height is always made at least big enough for everything on the
> line, and the boxes always sit on the lines, so nothing can "catch".
>
> Another thing to be aware of with floats is that their vertical position
> is initially determined by the vertical position of the line on which
> they originated (or the next line in the case of FF-- this is a known
> bug). But if they are moved downwards because they don't fit, they go
> "off the rails" of the line boundaries, and occupy a vertical position
> to the nearest pixel that gives them the horizontal space they need.
Thanks Ben, your two posts have straightened up my thinking now,
there seems to be something inhibiting me from diving into the
CSS2.1 specs (right here as icon on my desktop), perhaps in case
I still would not see it and then, of course, would have to shoot
myself. Your little side explanations have helped me.
--
dorayme
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|