- From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 15:24:20 -0700
- To: <neil@bigpic.com>
- Cc: "Style" <www-style@w3.org>
--- %cellhalign align => CSS:align --- I believe 'text-align' works here. --- %cellvalign valign => CSS:valign --- In CSS1 there is no 'valign' and UA support for height on non-replaced elements is optional. 'Vertical-align' only applies within a line box and so is no help. Perhaps what's needed is 'vertical-position' for situations where content height is declared as different from the 'auto' value. Vertical-position would apply to block elements and would accept values of top, middle, and bottom, with middle as default. In cases where the original content is taller than the height value the content would clip, either at the edge opposite the positioning edge or equally top and bottom when vertical-position is middle. The property would be inherited so it could be applied to a TABLE or ROW. --- <TABLE> width => CSS:width border => CSS:border frame => CSS:border in <TR> and <TD> ? rules => CSS:border in <THEAD> <TBODY> <TFOOT>? cellspacing => CSS:margin in <TD> cellpadding => CSS:padding in <TD> --- Frame and border are interrelated. Rules are borders on TH and TD. Neither IE nor N fully support these attributes. In IE, cellspacing is lost where cells abut without rules. (BTW, 'VOID' as a value?!! Why not 'none'? What perversity prompts such an incomprehensible deviation from accepted terminology? Surely this crept into the spec through simple oversight, not spine-void lackeyism.) Anyway, the question of how the CSS model can accommodate a table remains unanswered. Will there be a property for subdividing block elements? A new display type with a slew of new type-specific properties? David Perrell
Received on Tuesday, 21 October 1997 18:32:30 UTC