[Suitcoat]

Mkay, well I've been going out of my mind trying to figure this out.

I have the website set up like this

So basically, areas A, B, and I are just fine. However, I'm having trouble with the sides (C,E,G and D,F,H). What I'm doing now is basically this...

C and D:

<td width="100" height="239" style="background-image:url(...IMAGE...);max-height:239px;width:100px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:top;"> </td>

And something similar for G and H:

<td width="100" height="239" style="table-layout:fixed;background-image:url(...IMAGE...);max-height:239px;width:100px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:bottom;"> </td>

And for E and F:

<td width="100" style="background-image:url(...IMAGE...); background-repeat:repeat-y;"> </td>

So the general idea is to basically define heights for C, D, G, and H, and to leave the heights for E and F undefined to allow that row to change size according to the content in block I. This works PERFECTLY in Firefox (link to preview), but really messes up in IE (another preview). It's almost as if IE is COMPLETELY ignoring the heights that I specify. I've tried simply putting "height" (in both the <td> tag and the STYLE), but still no dice.

Any solutions? Thank you very much.

 

[jamiemac2005]

Hey, i can't tell (from what you've given us) what the problem is, since the rows seem fine. For us to work out what the problem is you'd have to post up either the entirety of your site's code or a link to the site somewhere online so we can see it in action...

Cheers,
Jamey

 

[ahmorrow]

I agree. We can give you comments on part of the code, but there could be a number of variables going on here.

 

[Suitcoat]

Ya know what, I think that this is simply too much of a hassle to really comb over. I think I'll just make a CSS tableless layout that kinda resembles this. Thanks anyways.

 

[dm01]

If you think that would be a good solution, then go for it, Suitcoat. If you run into difficulty, you know where to find help

Table-less (<div> and CSS-based) layouts can be a pain, but they are considered "better" because they aren't at the mercy of the browser to display the way the developer wants.

 

[Suitcoat]

Did it all in CSS, and it works perfectly Looks just like (if not better) than what I first had in mind.

 

[dm01]

Glad you got it sorted out.

You can mark this thread as solved by selecting "Mark this thread as solved" from the Thread Tools menu at the top of the page.