ifubad

that's more user friendly. I write a lot of software and instructions, alway tried to make it so that no one has to ask questions to know how to use something.

don't take this in a bad way. First, most users that may get suckered by phishing email, are pretty computer illiterate, probably the type that you would have to spend an hour walking them thru on where the start button is, I just can't imagine them knowing where the email header is. The ones that do know, will most likely not fall for those scams anyway. You need to design it to be super user friendly somehow, that's the tricky part.

Works with Vista also, see the requirements that wildteen posted. I tried and am still using IEtester, compared its rendering for the different IE, to a browser screen shot site like http://ipinfo.info/netrenderer/index.php, so far, it all looks the same (cudo to the author). The only minor bug I noticed so far, is that when you first open IETester, make sure to select the default browser 7 "first", if you select any other versions first, it will crash the app itself, does not cause any problem with Windows, it's a known bug. Try it out, it's free, doesn't hurt.

for IE, you can run 5.5, 6, 7 & 8 beta all in one app, without doing a multiple IE install, you just have to have xp sp2 with IE7 http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/HomePage

don't know if it's a bug or not, since all newer browsers does the same thing. Oh well, just have to work around it by setting things fixed for now.

why bother with the headache of ie5 when the user % is only about .1% http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp But, I am sure you have your reasons.

haku, did you miss the part that the DIVs are floated and not just plain old DIVs?

No width has been applied to any parent block level elements. When a float is applied to a div or any other elements (either a block or inline), no matter what, it turns into a block. But, unlike a normal block that stretches across the complete width of its parent container, a floated block should wrap around the child. Don't know why there is a difference between FF2 and 3, but take a look at this expanded simplified page http://www.waiming.com/test/floatwrapissue.html, which shows different amounts of child DIVs. In FF2, they all wrap 10px pass the right hand box(es), NOT stretching the full width of its parent container. In FF3, they all wrap the same way, except that when there are too many DIVs to fit on the same row and have to wrap to the second row, then that's when the block stretches the full width of its parent, which does not make sense. 1. Look at the bottom examples of the page, the first span has block applied, and it stretches the full width of its parent. 2. The second span has only float applied, which automatically turns into a block, but wraps around the content and NOT stretching across. Just so that it is easy to see, I applied height to it, since it is a block element now.

The more I check into this, the more it seems like a bug

I added a simplified page http://www.waiming.com/test/tmp.html which is much easier to look at, just enough css to show the problem, where the red dashed border goes all the way across the width of the black parent container in FF3, where it should have been only 10px from the right edge of the blue child DIVs.

test page http://www.waiming.com/test/pages/catalog.php The floated DIVs wraps around its content as expected in FF2, IE6 & 7, but not FF3 I commented out some of the css properties and added borders to make it easier to look at parent DIVs #catalogContent (dashed black border) it's floated and its automatic width is just enough to wrap around the child thumbnail DIVs plus their outer margins #subCatalogContent (solid red border) However, in FF3, the div #catalogContent automatic width extends to it's parent div instead, adding the extra space to the right. Can't figure out what is causing that, since it works fine in FF2?

or if you want to check for those two specific indexes (apple, orange, etc.) before retrieving the data foreach ($array as $key=>$value) { if ($array[$key][0] == 'apple') { $returnVal = $array[$key][1]; } }

when you read in the lines from the db, each line will be stored in an array, creating a multi dimensional array. Say if the array is just named $array, to retrieve the index that you are asking about in you post apple/bud = 4 orange/bud = 2 while you are looping thru the array, you access each line and the specified index like so foreach ($array as $key=>$value) { $returnVal = $array[$key][1]; } There are slightly different ways to doing it, this is just one simple way

Forget it, I got the calculation 243px / 100 = 2.43% 125px / 2.43 = 51.44% 2.43 * 51.44 = 124.9992px I just thought maybe there was an easier way with a php function that I don't know about.

or do I need to just do some good old basic math like 243px / 100 = 2.43% 125px / 2.43 = 51.44% 243px - 51.44% = 125px

Using getimagesize to get the width that is always larger than 125px, and the width will always be adjusted down to 125px. How can I get the percentage difference of the adjustment? thnx

Amazing, if you put text-align:center in the right div, it actually will horizontally center the image and text within IE6, but not FF2. Huh...

correct, left:50% goes by the left side of the absolute object. Cool, I'll use php. thnx

Ok, using position relative and then absolute to vertically align the image to the bottom of its container was really simple. Now, the other problem is that when an element is set to absolute, it automatically left align itself to its parent container, and to center it horizontally, I need to set the left property? If so, now the tricky part is that if the width of each image is different, is the only way to figure out how many pixels to apply to the left property is using php? (which I already figured out the math to do that with, just trying to see if there was a more efficient way of doing this).

I'll save it for future reference. I need it to also work in IE and prefer not to use hacks. It's only a single page that needs this, I guess I may just have to be deal with using table. Why did Bill Gates named his company after his penis??? Thnx anyway

the vertical-align property only works with aligning the surrounding text of the img's parent element, it does not move the image at all.

is it possible to easily align an img to the bottom of a div, other than the methods below? Only methods I found so far, is to either utilize a table or using position.

I see

maybe I'm just not understanding the way God explained it Since a float is also not considered a part of the flow anymore, but clear works with it, while absolute is also not part of the flow, and clear does not not work with it. Oh well, guess that's just the way it is and I'll have work around that issue.

Clear only works for statically/relatively positioned divs that go with the flow of the document I know clear works with float, but isn't that also being removed from the flow of the document, hence the container collapsing since nothing is considered to be there anymore?