«

On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 00:18:16 +0100, Alfred Molon wrote:

> There is probably a simple answer to this, but for some reason I haven't
> figured it out yet.
>
> 1. How do I replace a table with three columns with an equivalent div-
> based code?
>
> From:
> <table>
> <tr><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr>
> </table>
>
> to:
> <div>
> <div id="div1"></div><div id="div2"></div><div id="div3"></div>
> </div>
>
> 2. Same question for a table with three rows:
>
> From:
> <table>
> <tr><td></td></tr>
> <tr><td></td></tr>
> <tr><td></td></tr>
> </table>
>
> to an equivalent code with divs.
>
> Should be easily possible with CSS based on what I understood.

Use <ul> instead.

<ul style="Display:inline;">
<li></li><li></li></li>
</ul>

This would cause columns to be shown.
For a new row, just duplicate the three lines.

For a single column just <div>. Each new division creates the new row
without styling.

richard <> wrote in news:1l0zwltn2ti9d$.1ottvsrqvz2og.dlg@
40tude.net:

> Use <ul> instead.
>
> <ul style="Display:inline;">
> <li></li><li></li></li>
> </ul>
>
> This would cause columns to be shown.

No, it doesn't. Did you test this before you posted, RtD?

On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:35:44 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote in alt.html:

> richard <> wrote in news:1l0zwltn2ti9d$.1ottvsrqvz2og.dlg@
> 40tude.net:
>
>> Use <ul> instead.
>>
>> <ul style="Display:inline;">
>> <li></li><li></li></li>
>> </ul>
>>
>> This would cause columns to be shown.
>
> No, it doesn't. Did you test this before you posted, RtD?

Course he didn't.
What a wingnut.

--
Mama say, everybody little bit gay.

On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:35:44 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:

> richard <> wrote in news:1l0zwltn2ti9d$.1ottvsrqvz2og.dlg@
> 40tude.net:
>
>> Use <ul> instead.
>>
>> <ul style="Display:inline;">
>> <li></li><li></li></li>
>> </ul>
>>
>> This would cause columns to be shown.
>
> No, it doesn't. Did you test this before you posted, RtD?

http://1littleworld.net/notable.html

richard the sto0pid dumbass wrote:

> Doug Miller wrote:
>> richard <> wrote:
>>
>>> Use <ul> instead.
>>>
>>> <ul style="Display:inline;">
>>> <li></li><li></li></li>
>>> </ul>
>>>
>>> This would cause columns to be shown.
>>
>> No, it doesn't. Did you test this before you posted, RtD?
>
> http://1littleworld.net/notable.html

Jeebus! You just *can't* write an error-free page!

<http://validator.w3.org/check?verbos...ittleworld.net
%2Fnotable.html>

You should just give up web authoring and stick with the kiddie porn and
mocking the police.

--
-bts
-This space for rent, but the price is high

richard <> wrote in news:5z1t8a37gugg$.77qu7ceprhzp$.dlg@
40tude.net:

> On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:35:44 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> richard <> wrote in news:1l0zwltn2ti9d$.1ottvsrqvz2og.dlg@
>> 40tude.net:
>>
>>> Use <ul> instead.
>>>
>>> <ul style="Display:inline;">
>>> <li></li><li></li></li>
>>> </ul>
>>>
>>> This would cause columns to be shown.
>>
>> No, it doesn't. Did you test this before you posted, RtD?
>
> http://1littleworld.net/notable.html
>
Where we do ***NOT*** find "<ul style="Display:inline;">, RtD.

<Style type="text/css">

ul li {list-style-type:none; display:inline-block; width:100px; height:100px;
border:solid 2px #00f; margin:0px;}
ul {margin:0px;}
</style>

On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 04:25:14 +0000 (UTC), Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> richard the sto0pid dumbass wrote:
>
>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>> richard <> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Use <ul> instead.
>>>>
>>>> <ul style="Display:inline;">
>>>> <li></li><li></li></li>
>>>> </ul>
>>>>
>>>> This would cause columns to be shown.
>>>
>>> No, it doesn't. Did you test this before you posted, RtD?
>>
>> http://1littleworld.net/notable.html
>
> Jeebus! You just *can't* write an error-free page!
>
> <http://validator.w3.org/check?verbos...ittleworld.net
> %2Fnotable.html>
>
> You should just give up web authoring and stick with the kiddie porn and
> mocking the police.

BFD wrong end tags for that document.
errors fixed.

On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 11:40:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:

> richard <> wrote in news:5z1t8a37gugg$.77qu7ceprhzp$.dlg@
> 40tude.net:
>
>> On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:35:44 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:
>>
>>> richard <> wrote in news:1l0zwltn2ti9d$.1ottvsrqvz2og.dlg@
>>> 40tude.net:
>>>
>>>> Use <ul> instead.
>>>>
>>>> <ul style="Display:inline;">
>>>> <li></li><li></li></li>
>>>> </ul>
>>>>
>>>> This would cause columns to be shown.
>>>
>>> No, it doesn't. Did you test this before you posted, RtD?
>>
>> http://1littleworld.net/notable.html
>>
> Where we do ***NOT*** find "<ul style="Display:inline;">, RtD.
>
> <Style type="text/css">
>
> ul li {list-style-type:none; display:inline-block; width:100px; height:100px;
> border:solid 2px #00f; margin:0px;}
> ul {margin:0px;}
> </style>

Correct. Because I wanted to show the two different possible styles.
In the post to the group, it's a wonder you're not bitching because I used
the inline styling method as well.
Or bitching about how come I left out padding in the UL styling.

Where exactly is your absolutely perfect web site again?
In the recycle bin?

Hot-Text wrote:
>
> For UL LI can not be on the same line

Aside of the fact that *no one* is using that ancient version of
Netscape that didn't support the STYLE element, UL and LI can ABSOLUTELY
"be on the same line" in a stylesheet rule. You need to look up
*descendant selectors*.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

richard <> wrote in news:13zhtajcvp96e.901pysc70k90$.dlg@
40tude.net:

> On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 11:40:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> richard <> wrote in news:5z1t8a37gugg$.77qu7ceprhzp$.dlg@
>> 40tude.net:
>>
>>> On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:35:44 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>> richard <> wrote in news:1l0zwltn2ti9d$.1ottvsrqvz2og.dlg@
>>>> 40tude.net:
>>>>
>>>>> Use <ul> instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> <ul style="Display:inline;">
>>>>> <li></li><li></li></li>
>>>>> </ul>
>>>>>
>>>>> This would cause columns to be shown.
>>>>
>>>> No, it doesn't. Did you test this before you posted, RtD?
>>>
>>> http://1littleworld.net/notable.html
>>>
>> Where we do ***NOT*** find "<ul style="Display:inline;">, RtD.
>>
>> <Style type="text/css">
>>
>> ul li {list-style-type:none; display:inline-block; width:100px; height:100px;
>> border:solid 2px #00f; margin:0px;}
>> ul {margin:0px;}
>> </style>
>
> Correct. Because I wanted to show the two different possible styles.

Apparently it hasn't sunk into you yet that the first one DOESN'T WORK.

> In the post to the group, it's a wonder you're not bitching because I used
> the inline styling method as well.

No, RtD, I'm bitching because you posted something that DOESN'T WORK.