How do I get this to work?

Please take a look at the following page:

If you are using IE: http://home.comcast.net/~delerious1/index2.html
If you are using Mozilla: http://home.comcast.net/~delerious1/index2_moz.html

I'm trying to have a navigation menu on the left, and content on the right.
With my default browser setups, there is a little bit of whitespace between
the navigation menu and the content area, which is what I want. But I would
also like the user to be able to view the page with whatever text size he/she
prefers, and that is where my page breaks. If I increase (in IE) or decrease
(in IE or Mozilla) the text size, then the navigation menu all of a sudden
overlaps with the content area. I'm using em to specify the left side of the
content area, so I thought that would move the content area over the correct
amount when the text size gets adjusted, but either I don't understand em or I
am not doing it correctly.

I also thought that the fact that I am using images in my navigation menu
might be screwing up the em, but that is not the case, as you can see here:

If you are using IE: http://home.comcast.net/~delerious1/index3.html
If you are using Mozilla: http://home.comcast.net/~delerious1/index3_moz.html

Any tips on how I can get this to work would be appreciated! Thanks!

Hmm... it would appear that tables *are* still necessary in some cases to
manage layout.

Sometime around Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:08:14 GMT, delerious (AT) no (DOT) spam.com is
reported to have stated:

I'm trying to have a navigation menu on the left, and content on the right.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~apple77/column...n_navleft.html

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au

delerious wrote:

Hmm... it would appear that tables *are* still necessary in some cases to
manage layout.

Or that most of us are bored of all these layout questions and don't feel
compelled to answer every "How do I..." question posted.

The fact of the matter is that any table-based layout can be replicated in
CSS (as long as you're not worried about retrofitting it to work in
years-old broken browsers).

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132

In article <3fcf0237.13034623 (AT) news (DOT) md.comcast.giganews.com> in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets, <delerious (AT) no (DOT) spam.com>
wrote:

Please take a look at the following page:

If you are using IE: http://home.comcast.net/~delerious1/index2.html
If you are using Mozilla: http://home.comcast.net/~delerious1/index2_moz.html

Does nobody but me see something very wrong with the idea that there
should be different pages for different browsers?

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/
2.1 changes: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/changes.html
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

Quoth the raven named Stan Brown:

In article <3fcf0237.13034623 (AT) news (DOT) md.comcast.giganews.com> in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets, <delerious (AT) no (DOT) spam.com
wrote:

Please take a look at the following page:

If you are using IE: http://home.comcast.net/~delerious1/index2.html
If you are using Mozilla: http://home.comcast.net/~delerious1/index2_moz.html

Does nobody but me see something very wrong with the idea that there
should be different pages for different browsers?

Hey, I'm with ya. See the other thread that begins with "arghh."

Separate browser versions are complete headaches to maintain. A
well-planned layout doesn't even need two versions for screen and print.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

A well-planned layout doesn't even need two versions for screen and print.

How so? I don't know about you, but I don't want to see navigation or
login information on a printed page.

Leif K-Brooks wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
A well-planned layout doesn't even need two versions for screen and
print.

How so? I don't know about you, but I don't want to see navigation or
login information on a printed page.

quite right, but that doesn't mean two versions

--
William Tasso - http://WilliamTasso.com

In article <ZIfAb.288$MY.218908 (AT) monger (DOT) newsread.com> in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets, Leif K-Brooks
<eurleif (AT) ecritters (DOT) biz> wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
A well-planned layout doesn't even need two versions for screen and print.

How so? I don't know about you, but I don't want to see navigation or
login information on a printed page.

Neither do most of us -- that's why most of us assign classes to
those items that are display:none on the print stylesheet.

The idea is that there are two stylesheets, but only one of every
Web page.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/
2.1 changes: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/changes.html
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

William Tasso wrote:

quite right, but that doesn't mean two versions

Sorry, my mistake. Thought Beauregard T. Shagnasty was talking about
seperate style sheets, not seperate pages.