Closed Bug 245332 Opened 22 years ago Closed 21 years ago

inline list-elements ignores width and displays nested block elements incorrect

Categories

(Core :: Layout: Block and Inline, defect)

x86
Windows 2000
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 50626

People

(Reporter: diquadrat, Unassigned)

References

()

Details

User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) Build Identifier: Up to 1.7rc2 defined width of an inline-list-element is ignored nested block-elements breaks the inline-flow of list-elements Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. define list-elements as inline 2.a. define width for a list-element 2.b. nest a blockelement within a list-element Actual Results: 2.a. width is ignored 2.b. the nested block-element breaks the inline-flow of list-elements Expected Results: look at the images in the demo-page (URL above) or with MS Internetexplorer 6.0 (sp1)
Width only applies to block elements, so it should be ignored on inline elements. The other test looks right to me too. Why are you expecting a block element to not line-break? Bug appears invalid....
Internet Explorer 6 itself renders the page very similar to Mozilla when you change the doctype to strict HTML4 and force it into standards compliant mode.
(In reply to comment #1) > Width only applies to block elements, so it should be ignored on inline elements. > The other test looks right to me too. Why are you expecting a block element to > not line-break? I expect that a block element do a line-break with other elements at the same level, but i'm not expecting a line-break to his parent element. e.g.: a div nested in a other div don't make a line break within its parent div - why should this be different if the parent element is inline?
> e.g.: a div nested in a other div don't make a line break within its parent > div Actually, it does. Try it. This bug is invalid -- our rendering is correct per CSS2.1.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 22 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
Status: RESOLVED → UNCONFIRMED
Resolution: INVALID → ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 50626 ***
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 22 years ago → 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.