W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2010

Re: percentage heights in tables (section 17.5.3 of the CSS2.1 spec on "table height algorithms")

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:03:05 -0700
Message-ID: <52F5897D7B9E4FEBA6C1300C45D143B1@terra3>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Peter Moulder" <Peter.Moulder@infotech.monash.edu.au>
Cc: "sam" <samuelp@iinet.net.au>, <www-style@w3.org>


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 6:34 PM
To: "Peter Moulder" <Peter.Moulder@infotech.monash.edu.au>
Cc: "sam" <samuelp@iinet.net.au>; <www-style@w3.org>
Subject: Re: percentage heights in tables (section 17.5.3 of the CSS2.1 spec 
on "table height algorithms")

>> The main point is that it does add more implementation effort than you'd
>> expect, and at the moment I believe there are still more significant 
>> issues
>> with tables both in the spec and in the extent to which the table spec is
>> implemented in common CSS user agents, so I would expect percentage row 
>> heights
>> to be widely implemented soon.
>
> I assumed that it would follow the standard rules for percentage
> heights, in that, say, percentage row heights would only 'work' if the
> table had a *definite* height.  It wouldn't try to infer what the
> percentage would have to mean based on other row heights.  Essentially
> it would work exactly as if the table elements had normal, non-table-*
> display types.  Then the value obtained from that calculation would be
> fed into the standard table row/cell height calculations.
>

That’s me and flex units [1] again.  In some conditions in tables "HTML 
percents" behave
differently than "CSS percents".

Consider this sample:

<html>
<body>
<table border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="10" width="100%" 
height="100%">
  <tr><td>1</td></tr>
  <tr height="100%"><td height="100%">2</td></tr>
  <tr><td>3</td></tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The only way to translate such percents to CSS is to introduce flex units in 
CSS.  No other way so far.
All 100% here are precisely 1*;

As I said many times already that in 99% of cases when people are asking for 
better percents in CSS
they are asking for flexes.

Sorry for boring persistence.

[1] http://www.terrainformatica.com/w3/flex-layout/flex-layout.htm

-- 
Andrew Fedoniouk

http://terrainformatica.com
 
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2010 07:03:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:25 GMT