Posted by Andy Dingley on 06/18/07 13:04

On 18 Jun, 12:35, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
> The only proviso is that if the image-boxes are of different heights the
> result be a bit higgledy-piggledy.

Widths too. My usual compromise fix for this is to set the width of
the image-box in ems (based on the texts), min-width in pixels (based
on the image, plus some minimum allowance for the text) and similarly
for the heights. It works tolerably well for thumbnail "galleries"
where we care more about consistency than optimized fit. For "article
pages with multiple images" I do the same, then over-ride with
explicit widths (pixels) inlined on each image box, according to the
particular image.

You have to choose your particular best compromise here accordng to
context. There's no "one size fits all" solution.

[Back to original message]