W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 1999

Re: table backgrounds

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 11:26:22 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199906051526.LAA17914@ice1.fas.harvard.edu>
To: www-style@w3.org
On Sat, 5 Jun 1999 11:05:22 -0400, "Braden N. McDaniel"
(braden@shadow.net) wrote:Chris Karnaze (karnaze@netscape.com) wrote:
> 
> But then the question becomes: if a row and column specify different
> backgrounds, which wins? Who's on top?

This question is actually answered quite clearly in section in section
17.5.1 of CSS2 [1].  The answer is basically the same as yours:  the
backgrounds should be drawn in the order table, then column groups,
then columns, then row groups, then rows, then cells.  I have written
a few tests for this behavior [2].

However, the statements "the (rows/row groups) cover the whole table"
[1] makes it seem that the rows must also cover the vertical
cell-spacing (I think we seem to agree that they should cover the
horizontal cell-spacing).  This seems wrong to me.  I think it was
meant to imply only that every cell is in a row and in a rowgroup
(whereas the columns and column groups need not fill the whole table).

David

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/tables.html#table-layers
[2] http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/csstest/sec170501
    http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/csstest/sec170501a
    http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/csstest/sec170501b

L. David Baron      Freshman, Harvard      dbaron@fas.harvard.edu
Links, SatPix, CSS, etc.  < http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/ >
WSP CSS AC                   < http://www.webstandards.org/css/ >
Received on Saturday, 5 June 1999 11:26:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:59 GMT