SuzyUK - 9:33 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0) Interestingly they reckon hasLayout effects all the main elements of the visual formatting model to some extent:
***** News, interested in further reading? google "having layout" - the Ingo Chao (and notable collaborators) article has been comprehensively updated today and although still general in it's conclusions, it is the best explanation there is so far.
Interestingly they reckon hasLayout effects all the main elements of the visual formatting model to some extent:
Just about everything really!
>> common denominator
As my little head sees it: Look at the affected element and think of it as the child, does it know how much room it has to grow without having to do any sort of abstract calculation (e.g. px, percentage, em or default for that matter margin, borders or padding ~ this includes the default margin/padding applied to lists for example), is there anything in it's parentage that will tell it exactly what size to be? (forget doing any sums here as soon as you have to do that's were IE will fall)
If not it's very likely that's what triggered a "layout" bug: then as to where to apply the cure, I've tested some of PIE's bugs in the last few days and find that it's usually better to apply layout to the parent (disclaimer: PIE demos used instead of tinkering with any real world examples), as that gives them responsibilty, but sometimes the grandparent will do if that's less invasive, and then again sometimes it's better that the child takes responsibility for itself..
.. this is where the grey area of choice comes in as to which will work better for your pages.
The cure is the same, the logic, apparently, is non-existant! (Is this starting to sound like CSS Social Work?)
They also state in conclusion:
Not sure I understand that reasoning as I'm following another site where they're testing
contenteditablejust now and they're having related problems..
ackkk. (encyclo you're right this sucks!) ~ time for bed says zebedeee