W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > December 2010

[Bug 11479] add new row and rowgroup elements

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 09:37:20 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1PPXVY-00076w-IR@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11479

--- Comment #3 from Jim Michaels <jmichae3@yahoo.com> 2010-12-06 09:37:19 UTC ---
skip the css.  this is not essentially a css issue. yes, I closed that other
bug as wontfix, but only because (notice the subject) it was about the CSS of
col and colgroup.  this is about new elements row and rowgroup.  

you can't expect joe web developer to read this bug report to know that tbody
is supposed to group TR elements.  

also, the word tbody suggests that it is a container for the collective whole
of the content of the table just like body suggests that it is a container for
the collective whole of the content of the page.

I do not think tbody is a good candidate as a row grouper.  I don't think
anybody expects it to be.  I haven't seen any examples in any books which show
it as such either (which also tells me what people are thinking, that tbody is
a container for all the tr and td elements in the table).

also, does tr have the span attribute and other attributes which are associated
with col?  they should have the same attributes.

so ask yourself - why does col exist?  it provides some useful benefits.  same
with row.  If I have a section in a long table, I can save myself from
duplicating my CSS formatting for every row by using 1 row statement or
rowgroup statement with a span attribute. rowgroup should exist for rows for
the same reason colgroup exists for col: to group col elements, if I am not
mistaken.

in fact, one of the nice things I can do is format 1 th line (skipping 10 td
lines) with light green and repeat this over and over.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 6 December 2010 09:37:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:35 UTC