| Home | Register | FAQ | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| DesignersTalk > CSS | Table alignment with position:absolute in Internet Explorer |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Self Obsessed & Loving it
|
Have a look at this in Internet Explorer please. Notice the table isn't centered. (position:absolute) (div="center" on the table itself). The css file for IE is called mainie.css I have no idea how to fix it. I've tried margin-right, margin-left:auto, display:block, lots of IE hacks, nothing helps. Note that I HAVE to have position:absolute there (removing it fixes it) because I'm using scripts to fade out the logo on clicking portfolio (it works, give it a try). So how do I get it centered? Thanks for any help. EDIT: One more thing, click portfolio > top left thumbnail > click > notice how lightbox alignment is alos crazy. Help help help =) Last edited by azharc : 23-01-2008 at 08:54. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Spare Parts
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bracknell Forest
Posts: 6,875
|
Sorry, I did not read your post properly, perhaps this will not help after all. Or this perhaps? CSS Centering: Negative Margin |
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) | |
|
"Everybody's Dead Dave"
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Loughborough, UK
Posts: 146
|
Quote:
second'd. I was gna say pretty much the same thing. |
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) | |
|
unusual suspect ™
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DE, USA
Posts: 4,718
|
Quote:
That was written by someone that doesn't know what they are doing and who is trying to defend the fact. As a n00b you have even less reason to be using tables - learn the right way now rather than having to re-learn everything down the line. (Knowledge of tables is still a good thing as there will be times when you need to use them for the right reasons, sometimes even for the wrong ones when working for someone else but you really shouldn't be using them for layout). |
|
|
|
|
#10 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2
|
Hi everybody, I am the guy who wrote the article cited by azharc. I would be interested in knowing what is the problem with what I wrote since none of your comment makes sense to me, I feel like you haven't read through. I wrote that article a long time ago, during an experiment that I left behind cause I had no more time to keep it alive but, nevertheless, I still believe that what I wrote is quite right and instructive. Now, since I am not the kind of person who doesn't accept critiques and, trust me, I'm here to learn, I sincerely long to hear from you what is wrong with what I wrote. Especially herkalees who's blood is even boiling. Have you read it through herkalees? Thanks in advance |
|
|
|
#11 (permalink) |
|
Now with added sarcasm.
|
I just read the article to the very end and have to agree with the person who wrote the article (sorry herk) - if you actually read the full article you will agree that there's nothing new or wrong about what the author is saying. Don't just replace tables with divs, use the right HTML for the job at hand. It takes a while to understand that there's a difference and everyone keeps saying that they want to/should switch from using tables for lay-out to using divs, which can be just as bad if you abuse divs. Using tables for lay-out won't win you anyone's favour here, but technically speaking it will be as valid as a load of divs - put it through the W3C Validator and prove me wrong. Learn proper HTML and use tables for tabular data only - divs should only be used when no HTML element will be the semantically correct one to use. I made 100 posts and all I got is this stupid signature.
|
|
|
|
#12 (permalink) |
|
Grumpy old man
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North Japan
Posts: 2,405
|
Sorry Herk - I gotta agree with Jayx. I think you might have done what I did and just skim it. Jayx's comment made me go back and read it properly. The writer makes some good points and all of them are valid. In many ways all he's saying is don't just dump things into divs as a replacement for table cells because it calls what we now refer to as 'divitis' and breaks up your layout just as badly and non-semantically as tables did. Like he says, there's nothing particularly new in his opinion, but that doesn't make him wrong. However, I think azharc may be a little mistaken in his choice of defense. The article itself doesn't support his layout choices - more the opposite in fact. |
|
|
|
#14 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,336
|
That article makes the point that I'm often frustrated by - that people say "don't use tables, use divs" and leave it at that. What people need to be taught is the importance of separating content, semantics, and structure (HTML) from presentation (CSS). And behavior (JavaScript/DOM). |
|
|
|
#15 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2
|
Hi everybody. It looks like we had a little misunderstanding and I am thankful because by reading my article over and over I realized it was a bit easy to get my point wrong for the casual reader. I guess when I wrote it I thought it was so obvious I couldn't be advocating something like "tables for layout" that I simply did not state otherwise. My bad, I probably should have used a less cryptic title, maybe something like: "Don't replace tables with divs, use proper tags instead". Well, I learned my lesson here, if I'll ever embark into writing something about accessibility again I'll be more careful and direct. bye |
|
|
|
#16 (permalink) |
|
Self Obsessed & Loving it
|
Ok ok never mind the article lol.... somone help me fix the damn page =D Read the first post (view in IE, remember). I'll learn DIVs after I finish this website, just help me fix this one pllleeeaaasseee! EDIT : Or someone refer me to a good article that will help me convert the table to a div? |
|
|
|
#17 (permalink) |
|
Sans Comic
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 7,299
|
Its not really a matter of converting, rather its rewriting. Its like taking a book and turning it into a computer file. You can't just convert it, you have to re-do it. In the end, you have essentially the same thing, but the computer version is much more versatile. As to your problem, well I'll leave that to the experts... |
|
![]() |
|