Netscape 6 DIV layers not positioning correctly

[LydiaPack]

Hiya,

I've designed a site for Netscape communicator and IE, now I'm trying to set it up for 6 but my DIV layers with text in them show up around 10 - 15 pixels lower on the page than my layers with only gifs.

I've tried adjusting the style sheet incase it was something there but it wont fix it - does anyone have any suggestions - I'm desperately needing them! :-)

Thanks heaps for your help - I so need it!

[LydiaPack]

I can reply to my own question - I got a response in another forum and it works perfectly.

------------

Is the text in the DIV layers within a table? I've found that IE,
Communicator, and NN6/7 all position slightly differently unless text is
enclosed within a table (even if it's a single cell table). Ironically,
according to my measurements, it's IE and Communicator that are actually
off otherwise.

[tedster]

Welcome to the WebmasterWorld forums, Lydia.

What is the problem behavior here - divs get positioned differently when they contain text compared to their positioning when they only contain images?

I can see how tables might fix that but, sheesh, that's some strange behavior.

I'm curious about which positioning is accurate, the one with text included, or the one with no text.

[LydiaPack]

It looked to me like the layers with only gifs in them were acurate and the layers with text only weren't. I've been going through changing the files to fix this and I'm happy its now working for me - any suggestions as to why the tables solved this problem?

Lydia :-)

[tedster]

I can't say for sure - it's just a gut hunch based on what parts of a browser need the developer's attention the most. It seems that, in order to render tables well, browsers need to do some rather complex calculations - whereas, divs can be handled with more of a lick and a promise" style code. Because of all that developer attention to the code for rendering tables, I can see that tables might sort of impose accuracy and override some glitches elsewhere in the browser.

I've noticed that a lot of browser rendering errors can be bypassed by wrapping one block level element in another block level element -- even though the container block "shouldn't" be required.

This is more of an intuitive approach after finding a bunch of work-arounds through the years. After all, we're trying to correct invalid browser behavior, so it's tough to come with "reasons" a lot of the time, except to say that this approach works, and that one doesn't.

Happy, happy, joy, joy!

[LydiaPack]

happy happy joy joy! :-) Good one to remember in the future when getting around brower issues - thanks for your help Tedster!