Hi
I am (still) trying to rid a site of tables. All was going well until I previewed it in Netscape. I have two columns that I was achieving by ‘floating’ left and right, however, Netscape doesn’t seem to like this and threw up multiple problems! So I guess what I am asking is is there a way to produce columns (that I can put a border round) without ‘floating’?
Hope this makes sense
Cheers
Burnsie

When you say "Netscape", what version are you referring to ?

Remember that most mozilla products use this type of formual:

actual width = padding + specified width + margin + border (padding, margin and border x2 if you use both sides)

Where as IE does this

specified width = padding + margin + space not defined + boreder

IE's box model totals them all up into your specified width where as mozilla products add each of them. So for it to work properly in mozilla products you need to subtract border padding and margin from your specified width in your style sheet.

hi
erm, I have tried every possible combination of margins, padding ,widths, borders and spacings but can not get my columns to line up exactly but I guess I can spend a few (more) hours trying! However, I want a border round the entire page but it only extends down the page as far as my nav bar after this i have two columns that float right and left and the border ignores these and sits up above them. i guess I could specify an exact hight in pixels but this would not be that practical due to the number of pages in the site as all are diferent.
Oh Im using version 8 of Netscape
Cheers
Burnsie

Is there a link you could post so we can help with the alignment issues? Or maybe just the code if the page isn't online?

When you float the columns you take them out of the document flow. I'm not sure how you have things set up or where you apllied the border, but the element where the border is set no longer considers the columns to be inside of itself. So as far as that element is concerned it's bottom is at the bottom of the navigation.

Usually I'll set one of the columns without floating it so it remains in the normal document flow or use the clear property on a footer that isnt posiioned or floated so it too remains in the document flow. Then when the border is applied either the unfloated column or the cleared footer is seen as part of the containing element and the border will extend where you want.

Originally Posted by vangogh

Usually I'll set one of the columsn without floating it so it remains in the normal document flow or use the clear property on a footer that isnt posiioned or floated so it too remains in the document flow. Then when the border is applied either the unfloated column or the cleared footer is seen as part of the containing element and the border will extend where you want.

I'm pretty sure that is how I do it too. Are you setting like a float:left and float:right? I would just make one a float and the other to get this effect.

IE's box model totals them all up into your specified width where as mozilla products add each of them.

It's worth noting this only happens in Pre IE6 versions of IE, and IE6 but only when in quirks mode. More info here:
Webmaster-Talk.com Webmaster Forum - Web Design, Coding, SEO Forums

Hi
Ok I have altered the design of the site so it looks ok in different browsers and using 'clear' works to get the outer border to surround the entire site. However I have one last problem!
I have two columns: the left floated side contains mainly text, which runs to the bottom of the page until it meets the border. The right floated side has three rows (or what would have been rows if I was using a table). The top two rows align to the top and are of fixed sizes. However, I would like the bottom row to run to the bottom of the page whatever the page size is, as dictated by the amount of text in the left column (like it would if I was using a table). Is it possible to do this without having to specify a fixed height for each row on every page? (Anyway I’m not sure this would work as Explorer and Netscape render the size differently!).

Once again I hope this makes sense

Cheers
Burnsie