W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2004

Re: border-spacing flaw

From: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 13:22:25 -0400
Message-ID: <410-220044126172225812@mindspring.com>
To: (wrong string) åvard Skjæveland" <pho@dataportalen.com>, www-style@w3.org

> [Original Message]
> From: Håvard Skjæveland <pho@dataportalen.com>
> Let me try to be a little more precise: I'm wondering why
> isn't a shorthand property for 'border-spacing-top', 
> 'border-spacing-right', 'border-spacing-bottom' and
> Is there a reason why you can only have one value (applies to all four 
> sides) or two (applies to horizontal sides and vertical sides, 
> respectively) values? Why isn't it done in the same fashion as the 
> 'border-width', 'margin' and 'padding' properties, where you can have 
> one, two, three or four values?

To begin with, 'border-spacing' specifies spacing between the borders of
adjacent cells.  This spacing is specified at the table level, not the cell
level.  The result is that for inter-cell spacing, you would always be
adding together 'border-spacing-top' and 'border-spacing-bottom' to
get 'border-spacing-height', so why not just use a single value instead
of two?  'border-spacing' also affects the spacing between the border
of the boundary cells and the border of the table.  While it might be
conceivable that one would want a different value here from the
inter-cell spacing, that effect is not common desired, and can be
achieved in other ways, so keeping things down to simply two values
is a good idea in my opinion,
Received on Monday, 26 April 2004 13:23:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:13 UTC