Welcome to the Treehouse Community
Want to collaborate on code errors? Have bugs you need feedback on? Looking for an extra set of eyes on your latest project? Get support with fellow developers, designers, and programmers of all backgrounds and skill levels here with the Treehouse Community! While you're at it, check out some resources Treehouse students have shared here.
Looking to learn something new?
Treehouse offers a seven day free trial for new students. Get access to thousands of hours of content and join thousands of Treehouse students and alumni in the community today.
Start your free trialKirt Perez
7,374 PointsWhy did Guil set the width of figcaption to 100% ? Also why did the figcaption not stick to top of the figure container?
First question is to why was it needed for the width to be set to 100%? It looks like it didn't change anything and wouldn't the default width be 100% already?
Second question, when you set the figcaption to absolute and the figure container to relative, I thought that the figcaption would stick to the top left of the figure container without any offsets to start. But the figcaption sat right under the image. The image, when inspecting it, looks like it inherited the relative position value from the figure rule so what kind of behavior am I supposed to understand here? Am I supposed to understand that if there are relative elements inside a container thats relative and is combined with absolute elements in the html, the elements will be in the order of the html?
Kirt Perez
7,374 PointsKirt Perez
7,374 PointsSomehow I can't edit my question but I'd like to add on to it.
Do we only use the position relative style on containers? That seems to be the trend here so far