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

Re: CSS2.1: Unresolved Table Issues

From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 16:37:41 -0400
Message-ID: <3D73CC14.5DF3312B@escape.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

Ian Hickson wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, fantasai wrote:
> >
> > Over-constrained Table Rows
> > ---------------------------
> >
> >   If a table row is over-constrained (all widths, paddings, and
> >   borders are specified, including the table width), what gives?
> >   There's no margin on the table cells.
> 
> Could you give an example of this? I don't think a table row can ever be
> over constrained, since it gets its width directly from the table and the
> cells, but in my experience you are rarely wrong about errors in the spec,
> so I'm sure I missed something...

(Hey, that's my line.) Having reread 17.5.2, I realize that /I/ missed
something. So the spec is fine as it is. (AFAICT, of course.)

So, my thanks for the compliment, and my apologies for the mistake. *bows*

> > Missing Case for Border Conflict Resolution
> > -------------------------------------------
> >
> >   | 4. If border styles differ only in color, then a style set on a
> >   |    cell wins over one on a row, which wins over a row group, column,
> >   |    column group and, lastly, table.
> >
> >   What happens if the border styles are both set on individual cells?
> 
> Personally, I'd hope document order would win in such an ambiguous
> situation.

I'd hope so, too.

> You'll be glad to know that the WG has, in principle, decided to take the
> errata suggested at the bottom of:
>    http://fantasai.tripod.com/www-style/2002/table-backgrounds/
> ...with minor editorial changes for clarity.

Thanks for the notification. :)

~fantasai
Received on Monday, 2 September 2002 16:33:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:16 GMT