- From: Simetrical <simetrical@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 15:29:58 -0500
- To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "\"Rainer Åhlfors\"" <rahlfors@wildcatsoftware.net>, mongolie2006-w3c@yahoo.fr
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > Sure it would: > > <table> > <tr> > <td rowspan=2>2 rows</td> > <td>row 1 col 2</td> > </tr> > <tr> > <td>row 2 col 2</td> > </tr> > </table> > > The "row 2 col 2" cell should match :nth-col(2), I would think. Ah, of course. You're quite correct. On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm just saying. I can see your point about convenience, but being able to > style nth-col in the absence of any COL tag would be HUGELY more broadly > useful for the 99% of tables that don't have COL tags.[1] I don't see why we couldn't have both. Presumably it wouldn't be *that* much extra effort to implement :nth-col() if you're already implementing :col(). (The reverse seems like it might be less true.) On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. I don't think we can > just guess at which columns styling is more important to individual authors > of individual projects, but we CAN make the rules unambiguous. Of course. The question is which set of unambiguous rules to choose. Considering a cell to be in all the columns it's logically in seemed more natural to me than considering it to be in only the first. As I said, though, I don't think it makes a big difference, since I can't see a use-case where you'd care.
Received on Tuesday, 30 December 2008 20:30:34 UTC