Posted by Sems on 09/26/07 08:36

On Sep 26, 6:37 pm, Neredbojias <monstersquas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:59:43
> GMT rf scribed:
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> How do I get two div sections to sit next to each other
> >>> horizontally?
>
> >> I subscribe to Andy's well-presented opinion on the matter. However,
> >> divs don't go "all the way to the bottom of the page" if the content
> >> is insufficient unless the author does something which is usually
> >> wrong. That's a fact to bear in mind particularly when considering
> >> backgrounds.
>
> > Further, what exactly is the "page"?
>
> > Usually, with a really simple HTML file, it is the end of that HTML
> > file. The bottom of the "content". Where the browser stops scrolling
> > when one leans on ones page down button, because said browser can't go
> > down any more. There is nothing further. Therebelow lie dragons.
>
> > However if one distrupts the usual content flow by introducing floated
> > elements or <shudder> absolutely positioned elements </shudder> then
> > one totally loses the concept of the "page".
>
> > Where is the bottom of the "page" for a floated element? The bottom of
> > the element? The bottom of the surrounding content?
>
> > Where is the bottom of the "page" for an absolutely positioned div
> > element?
>
> > Where is the bottom of the "page" for an absolutely positioned div
> > element where top: 1000px; has been specified? (try it and see, you
> > will need to scroll down). Indeed if that element is the only one in
> > the body of the HTML file where is the "top" of the "page"? Pixel 0 or
> > pixel 1000?
>
> > Hint: We don't actually know.
>
> > The best we can guess is that, after the browser has done its best to
> > lay out the content, after due consideration to these floated and
> > positioned elements, the bottom of the page is where there is nothing
> > more. That is, the browser does not need to draw anything below this
> > point. You have reached the end of the scroll bar. And no, there is no
> > CSS property to position something at the end of the scroll bar, least
> > of all the bottom of an element :-)
>
> > In any case HTML files do not describe "pages". They describe content,
> > with CSS to pretty that content. The browser lays out the elements
> > containing the content as it sees fit, with the CSS taken into
> > account. Why should we ask more? "Page" is for print, not web.
>
> > Ah, but I see I have just upset a considerable number of graphic
> > artists who think they are web drezigners ;-)
>
> Yeah, I agree. Page is at most an inexact concept when it comes to The
> Web. What you really have is a "set of content" which may contain
> subsets and elements therein. How these elements relate to one another
> in a visual and particularly semantic fashion for the non-visual
> interpreter is what web page design is about, not the physically-limited
> methods typically applied to print. That's why "fixed" web design stands
> out as being poor while a smoothly-flowing, adeptly-integrated page seems
> so intrinsically "right" and attractive.
>
> So-called designers who brag about the looks of their static page are
> really just saying that one frame in a movie appears nicely rendered.
> The rest of the movie sucks, but that isn't their worry because they are
> too dense to understand it.
>
> --
> Neredbojias
> Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I don't really have a best effort yet. I'm looking at changing some
old pages that use table style layout to use div's instead so I'm just
starting to think about how to go about this.

In this context when I say 'page' I'm just thinking about the
structure of the page and not any content. For example I'm thinking of
an area to place a title header, a space to place a menu down the left
hand side, and main content area on the right hand side. I'm more
thinking about the structure of the page instead of the content.

Yes I also aggree with your thoughts about using a fluid layout
instead of static layouts.

Thanks for your thoughts guys.

[Back to original message]