W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2000

Re: What's the use of visibility: collapse on table rows?

From: Matthew Brealey <webmaster@richinstyle.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:07:10 -0800
Message-ID: <38D9602E.3D6A@richinstyle.com>
To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2000, Matthew Brealey wrote:
> 
> > Invisible rows:
> >
> > Given that visibility is inherited and therefore that TR {visibility:
> > hidden} will hide its descendant table cells, why does the spec cite
> > visibility: collapse as useful in the context of table rows?
> 
> My reading of this is that 'collapse' will actually have the same effect
> as 'display:none', whereas 'hidden' will leave a blank area where the row
> would have been.

Possibly; however, I don't see how treating it as display: none is
consistent with 'This allows dynamic effects to remove table rows or
columns without forcing a re-layout of the table in order to account for
the potential change in column constraints.', since if the row is being
display: noned, then the table must be reflowed. It's a pity Opera 4
doesn't support it, so then we could see what it's meant to mean from
the person who wrote it (?) :-).
Received on Wednesday, 22 March 2000 11:03:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:04 GMT