How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

[Harlan Messinger]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout


"Peter Diedrich" <pdiedrich@gmx. de> wrote in message
news:8205d6ad.0 403020957.41786 7a5@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > CSS is GREAT for styling text but a total failure in respect of liquid
> > > layout.[/color]
> >
> > Sticking a footer text to the absolute bottom of the viewport is an
> > example of fixed layout, not liquid layout.[/color]
>
> Well, great that you are so clever in definitions. So I apologize for
> not being precise enough. I meant *horizontally* liquid. Actually, you
> could have read this from my posting but now it is also clear for
> pedants ;-)
>[color=green]
> > Liquid layout allows the footer to position itself at the end of the
> > page, no matter how long or tall the page is. This is a Good Thing for
> > various reasons that require a thread of their own.[/color]
>
> I cannot find a single good reason for this behaviour. Do you find the
> page counter in a books also depending on the amount of content of the
> page?[/color]

You certainly don't find the footer in the *middle* of a *printed* page, but
that's where it is if your *web* page is taller than the viewport's height
but the "footer" is fixed at the bottom of the screen.

You are confusing printed pages and screens. On the web, pages are not a
fixed height, and the screen is not the page.
[color=blue]
> I would say, rather no.
>
> It would be soooo great if instead of chatting funny things about
> everything senseless, that someone could *finally* help with the
> problem. I assume that I am not the only one who run into trouble with
> this footer thing. On the other hand there are so many sites which can
> do it. So how, pleeeease?
>
> Peter[/color]

[Harlan Messinger]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout


"Peter Diedrich" <pdiedrich@gmx. de> wrote in message
news:8205d6ad.0 403021002.62e3c 2e4@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > That's exactly what I tried. And as you say, no joy in IE. Just try to
> > > scroll the window and you see that CSS has another definition of
> > > "bottom" as the browser. The footer scrolls and overlaps the content.[/color]
> >
> > And isn't that what you wanted? Fixed will make it stay at the bottom of[/color][/color]
the[color=blue][color=green]
> > viewport, absolute will make it stay at the bottom of the screen (it'll[/color][/color]
go[color=blue][color=green]
> > away when you scroll).[/color]
>
> No, have you actually ever tried IE6 together with the bottom:0px
> thing? It behaves ridiculous. The footer overlays the content.
>
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > By the way, we speak of the most frequently used browser and not about
> > > speech or pre-historian text only browsers ;-)[/color]
> >
> > A good page will not differentiate between any browser except for the
> > presentation. Content should be structured well enough so it doesn't[/color][/color]
matter[color=blue][color=green]
> > what browser is rendering it.[/color]
>
> I agree. But still no answer on my OP.
>
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > CSS is GREAT for styling text but a total failure in respect of liquid
> > > layout.[/color]
> >
> > Many have had great success.[/color]
>
> Yes, either they say "NN4 or Mac IE go elsewhere" or they find
> themselves experimenting with numerous above mentioned hacks and
> tweaks and stylesheet switches.
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Simplest things and top
> > > most essential things like a "simple" footer which appears on billion
> > > websites can't be done in CSS easily.[/color]
> >
> > Again, I'm a little unclear on what you mean by footer. One which is[/color][/color]
always[color=blue][color=green]
> > viewable or one which is at the bottom and can be scrolled out of view?[/color]
>
>
> If content is less to fill the browser THEN footer stay in the bottom
> of viewport ELSE footer should be at the end of the page (eventually
> out of the viewport)[/color]

It doesn't work like that. EITHER you fix it in the viewport OR you include
it in the flow of the page.

[Peter Diedrich]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

> > * Look at your empty browser. What do you see? A status bar. This is a[color=blue][color=green]
> > 'footer'[/color]
>
> If you're using your web site as a platform for distributing an application
> that reacts to user input in real time, it may make sense to have a status
> bar fixed in the display. If you're just serving ordinary web pages, there's
> no "status" to display.[/color]

Jeeeeesus, this was just an example.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > * Look on your newspaper or a book. What do you see? A footer with a
> > page count, copyright information or whatever.[/color]
>
> In a book or publication or printed report with footers, the footers are at
> a fixed location because the page's are physically the same height. With a
> web document, pages are of variable height, and you normally display the
> footer (links, copyright info, etc.) at the bottom of the text, not at the
> bottom of the window.[/color]

This is the point. You are wrong. If a book's page is almost empty,
the page counter will still sitting in the bottom and not in the
middle of the page.
The page may have the same physical height, but the text has not. Any
my "page" is the FIXED browser window height. At least the browser
window height is normally fixed during a surf session.

O yes, it will not take more then 1 second that someone will reply.
Haha, but you can resize the browser. My reply in advance: Yes, you
can, but visitors will most probably set a comfortable browser size
once and use it for the surfing session.

[color=blue]
> By invoking
> Word you are not explaining why you think that in a browser window, the
> footer should appear fixed at the bottom of the window instead of flowing at
> the bottom of the document.[/color]

Because it looks bad if you have a page with just few content where
the footer with perhaps a dark background crosses the browser window
right in the middle of the browser window.

Peter

[Peter Diedrich]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

> Ok since you use both FB and IE, I'll make some demo pages.[color=blue]
> http://mikewilcox.curvedspaces.com/demo1.html
> http://mikewilcox.curvedspaces.com/demo2.html[/color]


Thanks for your effort but sorry, no joy in IE6. Works only in Firefox
here and even then the footer is overlaying the content (however,
this is something where I could live with)

[color=blue]
> I'd hate to have to listen to a site in a speech browser that was written
> poorly.[/color]

Again, our site is not intended to listen to. It's about graphics.

[color=blue]
> Well, there's more people with text browsers other than lynx, but there's
> also people who browse with author style sheets off and/or with their own
> styles.[/color]

OK, but then I could spend years for the perfect layout and they would
dump it anyway. ;-)

[color=blue][color=green]
> > I fully agree, but tables work and CSS seems to fail in many aspects.[/color]
>
> Apparently you and I have a different version of "work." For me, "work"
> means it's rendered without problems on any browser, including old, broken,
> or alternative format browsers.[/color]

Yes, this would exactly be my definition. A page should work on IE4.
Gotcha :-)

I would be attracted to bet with you a Whopper that more people are
using IE4 vs. a text browser.

[color=blue]
> IE has notoriously poor support for CSS.[/color]

We are 100% in line. THAT is why I do not use CSS. Look at your web
stats. How many people are using IE.

Do not take me wrong. I love the idea of CSS and would not have spent
so much time on it if I would not like the concept. But as long as the
browser are not working as smoothly with CSS as they do with tables,
how can people promote coding in CSS?
[color=blue]
> Hacks like these make things easier
> while we wait for MS to catch up.[/color]

Hopefully. I will be first to switch to CSS once the CSS compatible
browser base is established.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > an @import switch for NN4?[/color]
>
> It's my understanding that NS4 was one of the first (the first?) browsers to
> implement CSS 1. This was riddled with inconsistencies , and many developers
> (myself included) simply don't style for it. NS4 will only get the plain
> (but still entirely useful) page without style from me (that, or one with
> few style suggestions).[/color]

So you are comfortably doing so well, that you can effort to keep more
NN4 users in front of your door than I do without the speech/text
browser guys with "my" tables?!

[color=blue]
> IE for Mac has just about as bad of
> support as it does on Windows.[/color]

And yet another crowd of people you are saying "Sorry, you are not
welcome here".

That's the point.


.....Mmmh, I still have no footers at the bottom. Strange. Am I here in
a political debating forum? ;-)

Peter.

[Barry Pearson]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

Peter Diedrich wrote:[color=blue]
> The site design is pretty simple:
>
> =============== =============== ==============
>| Head |
> =============== =============== ==============
>| | | |
>| | | |
>| left | center | right |
>| | | |
>| | | |
> =============== =============== ==============
>| Footer |
> =============== =============== ==============[/color]
[snip][color=blue]
> But... How can I force the footer to stay at the bottom of browser
> even if few content does not push it to the bottom. Is there any
> chance with a combination of CSS and tables? Please no frame or
> scripting. Impossible?[/color]
[snip]

I note that there is a lot of discussion in this thread about the value of
footers. So I'll suggest a distinction:

On a printed page, there are sometimes "footnotes" . These supplement the main
material, and should be within "easy scan", but without interrupting the
reading. These don't appear to work on web pages as footnotes. Who wants to
scroll down to see them? The equivalent appears to be the "sidenote",
sometimes in a right-floated box, or else in a "rightbar". In the diagram
above, put these in the 3rd column, or (not very good in a 3-column design) as
right-floated boxes in the centre column. Frankly, I think this is really what
rightbars are good for. Then they are there to look at, but you don't need to
read them while reading the main material.

When a web page is considered to be, in some sense, a "document", there are
some "important but not urgent" administrative details. Perhaps copyright,
date created, date last updated, etc. (In a paper document, perhaps
corresponding to multiple-web-pages, these would only appear once). These
should not clutter up the display while a user is trying to get at the
content, but should be there if needed. And the convention is that these are
at the bottom of the page. (Obvious, really - it keeps them out of the way,
but people probably know where to find them if they really need them).

So, keep separate in your mind, and in your design, "supplement ary notes", and
"administra tive details". Put the first in (say) the rightbar, and the second
in (say) the footer.

I judge that this is what vast numbers of on-line services have done. Many of
the on-line news services have done this. They haven't just copied paper onto
the web. They have studied the *function* of the material, "supplement ary
notes" or "administra tive details", and translated this to the web
environment. That is probably why the 5-box 3-column design is so common, and,
in my opinion, so useful.

--
Barry Pearson

http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/

http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/

http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Kris]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

In article <8205d6ad.04030 20957.417867a5@ posting.google. com>,
pdiedrich@gmx.d e (Peter Diedrich) wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Sticking a footer text to the absolute bottom of the viewport is an
> > example of fixed layout, not liquid layout.[/color]
>
> Well, great that you are so clever in definitions. So I apologize for
> not being precise enough. I meant *horizontally* liquid. Actually, you
> could have read this from my posting but now it is also clear for
> pedants ;-)[/color]

Being generous with smileys after making insults will not gain you
favors.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Liquid layout allows the footer to position itself at the end of the
> > page, no matter how long or tall the page is. This is a Good Thing for
> > various reasons that require a thread of their own.[/color]
>
> I cannot find a single good reason for this behaviour.[/color]

See a different thread. Els is craving for different opinions.
<http://tinyurl.com/34fhr >
[color=blue]
> Do you find the
> page counter in a books also depending on the amount of content of the
> page? I would say, rather no.[/color]

What makes a paper page the same as a virtual one?
[color=blue]
> It would be soooo great if instead of chatting funny things about
> everything senseless, that someone could *finally* help with the
> problem.[/color]

This is Usenet. Live with it.
[color=blue]
> I assume that I am not the only one who run into trouble with
> this footer thing. On the other hand there are so many sites which can
> do it. So how, pleeeease?[/color]

<table height="100%">
....
<tr><td>foote r</td></tr>
</table>

--
Kris
<kristiaan@xs4a ll.netherlands> (nl)
<http://www.cinnamon.nl/>

[Kris]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

In article <8205d6ad.04030 21020.4d0b6be3@ posting.google. com>,
pdiedrich@gmx.d e (Peter Diedrich) wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
> > If you're using your web site as a platform for distributing an application
> > that reacts to user input in real time, it may make sense to have a status
> > bar fixed in the display. If you're just serving ordinary web pages, there's
> > no "status" to display.[/color]
>
> Jeeeeesus, this was just an example.[/color]

Documents and applications, apples and pears.
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > * Look on your newspaper or a book. What do you see? A footer with a
> > > page count, copyright information or whatever.[/color]
> >
> > In a book or publication or printed report with footers, the footers are at
> > a fixed location because the page's are physically the same height. With a
> > web document, pages are of variable height, and you normally display the
> > footer (links, copyright info, etc.) at the bottom of the text, not at the
> > bottom of the window.[/color]
>
> This is the point. You are wrong. If a book's page is almost empty,
> the page counter will still sitting in the bottom and not in the
> middle of the page.[/color]

Maybe footers of books should be at the bottom of the bookcase. Can you
maybe supply us with a _good_ reason why one would have a footer at the
bottom of the window? After all, there is a considerable effort needed
to achieve this, regardless of approach. Without that effort -- the
natural situation -- the footer is below the content.

"Because this and that site do it too" or "because you see it in books"
are not valid reasons.
[color=blue]
> The page may have the same physical height, but the text has not. Any
> my "page" is the FIXED browser window height.[/color]

No it is not. It is not called 'window' for nothing. You look through it
at the document; it is a framework to hold the document, not the
boundaries of it.
[color=blue]
> At least the browser
> window height is normally fixed during a surf session.[/color]

Mine isn't. I often change my window's dimensions.
[color=blue]
> O yes, it will not take more then 1 second that someone will reply.[/color]

Oh, thy sweet bitterness.
[color=blue]
> Haha, but you can resize the browser. My reply in advance: Yes, you
> can, but visitors will most probably set a comfortable browser size
> once and use it for the surfing session.[/color]

And because you have no way of telling what that size will be, why
making guesses about whether it is comfortable for a visitor to see a
footer at the bottom of the window, separated of the content by possibly
a 10 mile gap.

--
Kris
<kristiaan@xs4a ll.netherlands> (nl)
<http://www.cinnamon.nl/>

[Harlan Messinger]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout


"Peter Diedrich" <pdiedrich@gmx. de> wrote in message
news:8205d6ad.0 403021020.4d0b6 be3@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > * Look at your empty browser. What do you see? A status bar. This is a
> > > 'footer'[/color]
> >
> > If you're using your web site as a platform for distributing an[/color][/color]
application[color=blue][color=green]
> > that reacts to user input in real time, it may make sense to have a[/color][/color]
status[color=blue][color=green]
> > bar fixed in the display. If you're just serving ordinary web pages,[/color][/color]
there's[color=blue][color=green]
> > no "status" to display.[/color]
>
> Jeeeeesus, this was just an example.
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > * Look on your newspaper or a book. What do you see? A footer with a
> > > page count, copyright information or whatever.[/color]
> >
> > In a book or publication or printed report with footers, the footers are[/color][/color]
at[color=blue][color=green]
> > a fixed location because the page's are physically the same height. With[/color][/color]
a[color=blue][color=green]
> > web document, pages are of variable height, and you normally display the
> > footer (links, copyright info, etc.) at the bottom of the text, not at[/color][/color]
the[color=blue][color=green]
> > bottom of the window.[/color]
>
> This is the point. You are wrong. If a book's page is almost empty,
> the page counter will still sitting in the bottom and not in the
> middle of the page.
> The page may have the same physical height, but the text has not. Any
> my "page" is the FIXED browser window height. At least the browser
> window height is normally fixed during a surf session.
>
> O yes, it will not take more then 1 second that someone will reply.
> Haha, but you can resize the browser. My reply in advance: Yes, you
> can, but visitors will most probably set a comfortable browser size
> once and use it for the surfing session.
>
>[color=green]
> > By invoking
> > Word you are not explaining why you think that in a browser window, the
> > footer should appear fixed at the bottom of the window instead of[/color][/color]
flowing at[color=blue][color=green]
> > the bottom of the document.[/color]
>
> Because it looks bad if you have a page with just few content where
> the footer with perhaps a dark background crosses the browser window
> right in the middle of the browser window.
>
> Peter[/color]

[Harlan Messinger]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout


"Peter Diedrich" <pdiedrich@gmx. de> wrote in message
news:8205d6ad.0 403021020.4d0b6 be3@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > * Look at your empty browser. What do you see? A status bar. This is a
> > > 'footer'[/color]
> >
> > If you're using your web site as a platform for distributing an[/color][/color]
application[color=blue][color=green]
> > that reacts to user input in real time, it may make sense to have a[/color][/color]
status[color=blue][color=green]
> > bar fixed in the display. If you're just serving ordinary web pages,[/color][/color]
there's[color=blue][color=green]
> > no "status" to display.[/color]
>
> Jeeeeesus, this was just an example.
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > * Look on your newspaper or a book. What do you see? A footer with a
> > > page count, copyright information or whatever.[/color]
> >
> > In a book or publication or printed report with footers, the footers are[/color][/color]
at[color=blue][color=green]
> > a fixed location because the page's are physically the same height. With[/color][/color]
a[color=blue][color=green]
> > web document, pages are of variable height, and you normally display the
> > footer (links, copyright info, etc.) at the bottom of the text, not at[/color][/color]
the[color=blue][color=green]
> > bottom of the window.[/color]
>
> This is the point. You are wrong. If a book's page is almost empty,
> the page counter will still sitting in the bottom and not in the
> middle of the page.[/color]

Why do you think a browser is supposed to look like a book?

Are you saying that millions of web designers around the world are wrong to
be doing it the way virtually all of them do it, and only you have the
Correct, Enlightened approach? 'Cause if everyone were doing it the way you
say is the correct way, then surely you would have found millions of
resources telling you how to do it, and all the major browsers would support
it.
[color=blue]
> The page may have the same physical height, but the text has not. Any
> my "page" is the FIXED browser window height. At least the browser
> window height is normally fixed during a surf session.
>
> O yes, it will not take more then 1 second that someone will reply.
> Haha, but you can resize the browser. My reply in advance: Yes, you
> can, but visitors will most probably set a comfortable browser size
> once and use it for the surfing session.
>
>[color=green]
> > By invoking
> > Word you are not explaining why you think that in a browser window, the
> > footer should appear fixed at the bottom of the window instead of[/color][/color]
flowing at[color=blue][color=green]
> > the bottom of the document.[/color]
>
> Because it looks bad if you have a page with just few content where
> the footer with perhaps a dark background crosses the browser window
> right in the middle of the browser window.[/color]

Then you must be horrified by all the short pages you see on the web.
Apparently those of us you're conversing with here don't thing anything is
wrong with it.

[Barry Pearson]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

Michael Wilcox wrote:[color=blue]
> Peter Diedrich <pdiedrich@gmx. de> wrote:[color=green]
>>[/color][/color]
[snip][color=blue]
> Have you ever listened to a layout table being rendered in a speach
> browser?[/color]

Yes. If it linearises, it works OK.

This has been known since April 1999:

http://www.barry.pearson.name/articles/layout_tables/history.htm#y1999m04a

[color=blue]
> Or seen it rendered by a text-only browser like Lynx? Have
> you ever considered that when tables were introduced in HTML 2 they
> were for tabular data, not presentation?[/color]
[snip]

They have clearly been designed for presentation since 1993, before they were
even implemented in browsers:

http://www.barry.pearson.name/articles/layout_tables/history.htm#y1993m11a

--
Barry Pearson

http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/

http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/

http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Barry Pearson]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

Markus Ernst wrote:[color=blue]
> "Michael Wilcox" <mjwilcoDONTWAN TSPAM@yahoo.com > schrieb im[/color]
[snip][color=blue]
> Michael, of course you are right with everything you write. But the
> layout that the OP would like to achieve is really nothing special or
> even complicated. It is very basic. It is just: I want an element to
> align at the bottom of the window _or_ at the bottom of the page, if
> the content is longer than the window.
>
> I spend very much time to explain almost every client that exactly
> this is not possible (exept with a frame layout and all its
> downsides), and some of them end up in doubting my competence as it
> is something they see everywere.[/color]
[snip]

Why not use a simple layout table? Then it is possible.

In fact, if you use floats, rather than absolute positioning, surely you can
add an extra element that clears the floats, and provide a footer that way?

Of all the ways of laying out a web page, (normal flow, floats, layout tables,
absolute positioning, Frames, iFrames, etc), it is absolute positioning that
has this particular problem.

So, if this is the requirement, don't use absolute positioning! (There are
several alternatives).

--
Barry Pearson

http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/

http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/

http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Barry Pearson]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

Peter Diedrich wrote:
[snip][color=blue]
> No, this would be simple to make with tables (and CSS as well).[/color]
[snip][color=blue]
> I fully agree, but tables work and CSS seems to fail in many aspects.
> My table layout looks not too bad in Lynx.[/color]
[snip][color=blue]
> But where is the problem if there is any? In my personal experience -
> and I was willing to spend a LOT of time getting into it - CSS
> layouting is a pure nightmare. Almost nothing works consistently with
> the range of popular browser. But what I know for sure is that above
> table layout renders perfect on all popular browsers. I am tired of
> seeking trouble. ;-)[/color]
[snip][color=blue]
> But the layout is not as fluid as my table layout and I was not able
> to find out whether it has a footer as requested above. There is
> always too much content on each page to figure out.[/color]
[snip]

What you are experiencing is a tactical blunder by advocates of CSS
positioning. They tend to use "knocking copy" against layout tables. But,
since layout tables are demonstrably successful, perhaps accounting for about
99% of the pages on the web, year after year, they simply damage their
credibility!

Advocates of CSS positioning can't hope to prove their point by showing that
layout tables don't work, because they clearly *do* work. Instead, they should
accept what layout tables can do, (which many people know anyway), and show
what advantages CSS positioning can demonstrate. These lie in the following
areas:

- There are some layouts that CSS positioning can do that layout tables can't.
They should emphasise these.

- If you layout using CSS, you may have more opportunities to change the
layout via CSS alone. (Although CSS positioning often relies on HTML elements
that then constrain the layout).
[color=blue]
> P.S.: My apologies. I do not want to start yet another holy war of CSS
> vs. tables. I just asked how to make a footer at the border. I would
> love to do it with CSS if it could be done.[/color]

If absolute positioning had been intended for page layout purposes, I would
expect it to handle footers with ease. I draw my conclusions from the fact
that it struggles.

So, why not use "float" instead? Then you can add footers. "Float" wasn't
intended for page layout purposes - but I don't think absolute positioning was
either. (Fixed positioning may have been, but doesn't work in practice).

See:
Variations on the 5-box 3-column layout

http://www.barry.pearson.name/articles/layout_5_3/

--
Barry Pearson

http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/

http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/

http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Barry Pearson]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

Peter Diedrich wrote:
[snip][color=blue]
> ....Mmmh, I still have no footers at the bottom. Strange. Am I here in
> a political debating forum? ;-)[/color]

No. You are involved in a holy war! This is *far* worse than politics.

See:
Layout tables considered valuable

http://www.barry.pearson.name/articles/layout_tables/

--
Barry Pearson

http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/

http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/

http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Barry Pearson]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

Peter Diedrich wrote:
[snip][color=blue]
> If content is less to fill the browser THEN footer stay in the bottom
> of viewport ELSE footer should be at the end of the page (eventually
> out of the viewport)[/color]

Are you willing to accept "at the bottom of the content"? Even if this is half
way up the viewport, or way down a page and nedding scrolling?

It would resolve a lot of issues if that is what you mean.

--
Barry Pearson

http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/

http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/

http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Michael Wilcox]

Re: How to make footer at the bottom in 5 box 3 columns layout

Peter Diedrich <pdiedrich@gmx. de> wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
>> http://mikewilcox.curvedspaces.com/demo1.html
>> http://mikewilcox.curvedspaces.com/demo2.html[/color]
> Thanks for your effort but sorry, no joy in IE6.[/color]

position: fixed; has never worked in IE.
[color=blue]
> Works only in Firefox
> here and even then the footer is overlaying the content[/color]

It isn't overlapping in demo2, and I made it so it wouldn't. Exactly what do
you want? You could change demo1 so the div has a width of 100%, which might
make it look to some that the content is not being overlapped.
[color=blue]
> Yes, this would exactly be my definition. A page should work on IE4.
> Gotcha :-)[/color]

It certainly would work, but not with any style, and there's several ways to
do this.

http://w3development.de/css/hide_css_from_browsers/summary/

[color=blue]
> I would be attracted to bet with you a Whopper that more people are
> using IE4 vs. a text browser.[/color]

I don't know that I care that much. They'll still get the same page, with
all the same content, but without my presentation suggestions. That doesn't
matter to me since I can write semantically correct pages.
[color=blue]
> But as long as the
> browser are not working as smoothly with CSS as they do with tables,
> how can people promote coding in CSS?[/color]

Many people don't use tables for presentation because that's not
semantically what they're for. CSS accomplishes many layout techniques and
maintains a structurally sound page. This page can be viewed by all browsers
and remain logical.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> This was riddled with inconsistencies ,
>> and many developers (myself included) simply don't style for it. NS4
>> will only get the plain (but still entirely useful) page without
>> style from me (that, or one with few style suggestions).[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> So you are comfortably doing so well, that you can effort to keep more
> NN4 users in front of your door than I do without the speech/text
> browser guys with "my" tables?![/color]

"In front of my door"? As in they can't see my site? Certainly not, I took
time so that even the most baisc (or broken) browser could still view my
page. Maybe they don't get as many neat colors, but they still get a page
with the same, logical content.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> IE for Mac has just about as bad of
>> support as it does on Windows.[/color]
> And yet another crowd of people you are saying "Sorry, you are not
> welcome here".[/color]

See above.
--
Michael Wilcox
mjwilco at yahoo dot com
Essential Tools for the Web Developer - http://mikewilcox.t35.com