|
|
Posted by SM on 11/12/07 03:39
On Nov 9, 3:38 am, dorayme <doraymeRidT...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> In article <1qr3hbl0xduir$.dew6rcfkfsqr....@40tude.net>,
>
>
>
> Els <els.aNOS...@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> > dorayme wrote:
>
> > > In article <47337da...@clear.net.nz>,
> > > "Nik Coughlin" <nrkn....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > [snip]
> > > This is not really correct because the idea is that the
> > > thumbnails are an expansion of the item Tribute. Your
> > > alternative, below, is correct but it is not pedantic.
>
> > [snip example where the nested ul is inside the list element
> > *following* the Tribute list element]
>
> > I'll be pedantic then ;-), and say it is not correct. If the
> > thumbnails are indeed an expansion of the item Tribute, the list would
> > look like this:
>
> > <li><a href="#">Tribute</a>
> > <ul id="thumbnail">
> > <li><a href="#"><img src="images/photography/1.jpg" /></a></li>
> > <li><a href="#"><img src="images/photography/2.jpg" /></a></li>
> > <li><a href="#"><img src="images/photography/3.jpg" /></a></li>
> > <li><a href="#"><img src="images/photography/4.jpg" /></a></li>
> > <li><a href="#"><img src="images/photography/5.jpg" /></a></li>
> > </ul>
> > </li>
> > <li><a href="#">Cloud 9</a></li>
>
> That will teach me to be so soft-hearted and trusting! I had just
> posted at the time:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/27yrkx
>
> what I thought was a *more* correct plan than the OP
>
> and assumed without looking closely that Nick was following this
> general idea.
>
> --
> dorayme
Thank girls and guys!
Everything makes sense now....
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|