View Single Post
Old 01-24-2021, 01:09 PM   #45
phillipgessert
Addict
phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.phillipgessert ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
phillipgessert's Avatar
 
Posts: 316
Karma: 3200000
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Madison, WI
Device: Kindle 5th Gen
The other problem with height: 100%, unless I’m misremembering (likely), is that while width % first targets width of the parent container, and failing that it targets screen width; height % also first targets the parent, but failing that it does nothing at all. So in order to use height 100%, you’d first have to attach a height value to a parent element, and that doesn’t seem to offer any benefits compared to just picking an arbitrary width. At least not in this case where high compatibility is desired.

Last edited by phillipgessert; 01-24-2021 at 01:17 PM.
phillipgessert is offline   Reply With Quote