W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > October 2011

[Bug 13915] The suggested presentation differs from the common (if not universal) browser behavior for a table when no attributes and no author style sheets are used. The common default is to render the table with no borders. However, the CSS rules described here imp

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:37:57 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1REVmf-0001Wc-Fj@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13915

Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |NEW

--- Comment #7 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-10-14 00:37:54 UTC ---
Lots of effort went (and is still going!) into the spec's rules too. :-)

I don't understand several things about the Gecko rules:

- line 305: why do you reset border-color for table[frame] but not table[rules]
? (I guess it doesn't matter since it's the default anyway.)

- line 288: why do you set the border-width for table[rules] ? It seems to
disagree with IE, WebKit, and Opera:
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1191

- line 336: why do you not do 'border-collapse:collapse' for rules=none? All
other browsers seem to:
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1196

- :-moz-table-border-nonzero: why do you treat border=0 differently than
border=1, other than for the width being mapped to 0 rather than 1? This seems
to only be done by Opera and Gecko, and Opera's behaviour is buggy in other
ways so I'm not sure it really counts:
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1197

- why are there rules for cells that are children of tables? I haven't put
these in the spec for now.

- line 340: why do you override the border-width for cells if rules="" is
present even if it's not a valid value? IE does not. Opera mostly does not;
it's a bit buggy. Chrome does for valid values, but also has a weird but where
it sets it to zero by default so I'm not sure what to make of it:
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1199 (I've gone
with Gecko's behaviour here except only for valid values.)

- lines 342 and 354: the rules whose selector starts with
"table[rules][rules="none"]" are redundant with those that start
"table[rules]:not([rules=""])". Am I missing a reason why both need to be
given?

Other notes:

- I couldn't get any interop on
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1192 which tests
whether table[rules] should get border-style:hidden. IE doesn't have it at all
(they leave the default 'none'), Opera uses 'hidden' but only does it for valid
values of rules="", WebKit does 'none' but seems to default the width to 0
except on valid values, and Gecko uses 'hidden' on presence of rules="". (I've
done it but only for valid values.)

- Different browsers seem to have different ideas of which borders should be
given an explicit width in various rules="" states.
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1200
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1201
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/1202 (I've set the
value on cells for all valid values of rules, and on the borders that get an
explicit style in the cases where rules="" styles non-cells.)


I've attempted to fix the spec's rules to be more like Gecko except where
Gecko's rules are not compatible with anyone else. I would appreciate your
review.

-- 
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 Friday, 14 October 2011 00:38:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:02:05 UTC