W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2002

Re: css layout should be symmetrical

From: Jesse McCarthy <mccarthy36@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 10:25:48 -0400
To: <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E16uDh8-0001EY-00@harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
Don't put away the white-out yet.  You're going to need to rewrite 
more of that spec to get it to conform to your revisionist version of 
history.  (Aren't these kinds of fundamental changes in a technology 
traditionally accounted for by releasing new versions of the 
specification rather than manipulating one that's already been 
released for over three years piecemeal until it suits your own 
self-serving agenda?)

Let's break this down into simple terms.  Do the table display types 
assign table semantics to an arbitrary element?

On Sat, 06 Apr 2002 18:34:39 +0100, Ian Hickson wrote:
>Thanks to the people who pointed out where the spec said that table
>display
>types shouldn't be used in HTML.
>
>For the record, that section of the spec has been rewritten. It now
>reads:
>
>#   User agents may ignore these 'display' property values for HTML
>table
>#   elements, since HTML tables may be rendered using other
>algorithms intended
>#   for backwards compatible rendering.
>
>As the errata says, the intention was that a UA may refuse to render
>an HTML
>table as anything else than a table. The sentence was not meant to
>discourage
>the use of 'display: table' on other, non-table elements in HTML.
>
>So please people. Go out and use the table display types in HTML.
>There is
>nothing wrong with doing so. What is wrong is using the HTML table
>elements for
>non-tabular data, an all-too-common technique.
>
Received on Sunday, 7 April 2002 10:31:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:14 GMT