W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 1996

Re: MSIE Quirks

From: Carl Morris <msftrncs@htcnet.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 16:52:56 -0500
Message-Id: <199610202200.RAA08289@inet.htcnet.com>
To: "WWW Style List" <www-style@w3.org>, "Steve Knoblock" <knoblock@worldnet.att.net>
| tables are flexible and define only the relation of parts, not
layout. So
| why would a certrain margin setting be any more wrong than reducing
the size
| of your browsers window. I use tables for sidebars all the time.

I think a browser has a couple of goals:

1:  Render the HTML is a way that the user can navigate as easy as
possible.

This single item (there are more) is what I think says that a browser
like MSIE should try to keep the HTML from "scrolling" from left to
right until its no longer possible to keep it from doing that.

As such, I think that a TABLE WIDTH=100% that is inside an UL should
not stretch beyond the right margin.  I thought I read somewhere that a
TABLE's WIDTH=% attribute should be rendered using the available space
between margins...  An UL or OL reduce the margins, as does BLOCKQUOTE,
but MSIE doesn't reduce the TABLE WIDTH=% margins... and so a table
will over stretch its margins.  

The reason why I often force a TABLE to 100% is to control some
browsers misrendering of tables that aren't full size.  (like MSIE will
try to balance out the size of all columns, rather than using the
minimum needed space.

Also, this problem effects TABLES without WIDTH=100%.  If a table
contains enough data to make it full size, MSIE will render it similar
to that of a table with WIDTH=100% (but not the same, the width=100% is
actually the smaller table!)
Received on Sunday, 20 October 1996 17:53:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:45 GMT