[SOLVED] ngery/CSSMenu top + 2 columns template --- can one make it fix width?

[docman]

Hi, I use the above template. It is a fluid width template with some minimal width. I found the definition for the page wrapper (on in the template, one in its CCS).

What I would like to do is to make it fix width, say at 1024 across. The reason is, that I created an image rotator that would need a fix width. Now that I am saying this, the other solution would be to fix the width of the CSS #div definition for thos and also for the news module, both appearing in the sidebar. Well, still it is easier to fix the width of the temple (this should be simpler).

Thanks for your suggestions.

[Dr.CSS]

Remove the IE6 JS width calls from template, in CSS look for the min/max width setting and change to your desired size using just width:...

[docman]

Thanks. It worked. Would it not cause a problem removing the JS hack in IE6? I do not have IE6 available to me hence I cannot test. What would be the expected result?

Is there a modification of this command

#pagewrapper {width:expression(P7_MinMaxW(720,950));


for width, only?

Thanks again

[RonnyK]

Removing that IE-fix wont harm with a fixed width. That fix for IE6 and lower is only required as IE6 and lower doesnt understand 'em'. So when you use 'px' in the stylesheet, then the fix isnt needed at all.

Ronny

[docman]

I see. I am still using em in the style sheet. Should I used then px?

Incidentally, in your opinion why was width given in em in the style sheet in the first place, if using em invokes the need of an IE6-fix in the template?

Thanks.

[RonnyK]

Docman,

em is "units of the character M", so the width of 'm'. When people have different fontsizes on their site, the width goes along, as bigger font, means more width (the m gets wider ). So 'em' is kind of flexible width, based on character/font.

When you use 'px' in the stylesheet, the IE6-hack can go... Otherwise could it remain, when you make it similar min-max, as the width set in the stylesheet.

Ronny

[docman]

Thanks.

[RonnyK]

docman,

one piece of additional information here.... The IE-fix was NOT for 'em' but for min-width max-width, as apparantly that is what is not understood in IE6... I thought it was of the 'em', but got corrected in the meantime.

Ronny

[docman]

Thanks Ronny to clarify it.