Also i disagree with the.

Petrilli: Ye i thought it’s only accross channels of active network

Veneman: T-Rex_: i suspect nothing is going to work with that markup: you have 24 units of width when there should only be 12. those aren’t columns, they’re accidents

Ericson: Well it has to be in one row sadly, i already coded it out in javascript but you know always searching knowledge how this could be achieved with css

Fullman: Well like i mentioned i need one row : and i will not add rows with javascript dynamically

Veneman: Then you won’t get the effect you desire. the markup and style are doing exactly what they’re supposed to: they’re wrapping

Bouleris: I know mate just wanted to hear it from someone who is a pro

Gerberich: Ill stick with javascript and applying the biggest height to the tiles depending on the cl*** although i would be much more happier if i could se a row and put in 12 column worth of width

Veneman: Hooray! another waste of my time!

Roehler: Veneman: I copied what you suggested.

Denio: I enjoy wasting your time

Heimann: Thanks for the speedy answers again mate

Gulan: Still same:

Stecklair: What are you trying to achieve undrinkablesoup

Veneman: Undrinkablesoup:

Reddish: Veneman: It shows the boxes inside the table.

Veneman: Undrinkablesoup: so move them. you’re using position: absolute

Seppa: Undrinkablesoup # you’re going to have to learn at least something before you can actually use the advice from here, Resources to help you get started:

Armout: Veneman:

Densmore: Notice the problem now?

Kounthapanya: When I have it hovering so it shows up, I move the cursor left, and then it disappears.

Durtschi: Unless it’s exactly to the border.

Perich: Which means it has to have a pixed width, no?

Burningham: Also, I have past experiences with position: relative; causes all sorts of weird glitches, but I hope it won’t this time.

Nollman: But i thought all elements in the dom are natively positioned relativel

Veneman: Position: relative does exactly what it says it does

Veneman: T-Rex_: no. static is the default position

Widera: T-Rex_, CSS ‘position’ property:

Romines: See another thing learned!

Veneman: Undrinkablesoup: yes. because if you leave the td:first-child:hover, the display: block doesn’t apply anymore. this is usually why doing things like this in css is a pain in the ***

Barocio: How would you absolutely-position an element to the body?

Weinstock: Like fixed but where it’s not bound to the viewport, just the body

Castanon: Wait wait i know this one body position relative and element position absolute

Bobzien: But JS is even more of a pain.

Ligons: Why JS is such a beautifull language

Markoff: Http:// trying to feet these 4 green textboxes side one side but I think I am confusing with width calculation

Door: Ive been banging my head trying to figure out why there is a gap in the top of this page

Galm: I found this .orbit-wrapper.transparent-header div.slider-nav span, .orbit-wrapper.transparent-header article

Veneman: Wowk: they’re only 90px less than the full width of their parent. width: 100% isn’t about the content of the element

Fenstermacher: Btw why is bootstrap so ****ty when it comes to equalising heights

Veneman: T-Rex_: regarding your problem? because you’re doing your markup wrong. and for ****’s sake stop using your enter key. type an entire sentence

Allers: Also i disagree with the wrong markup, i think of it using bootstraps functionality but in my own way