Re: Technique 3.4.1 Check document for relative units of measure

Could there be some cases where an absolute size in tables and framesets may
be appropriate?

An absolute size is OK if:

If the table contains a form - the author may not want the form layout to be
changed by a table changing size.
If the table column or frame contains images (navigation buttons for
example) that are a set size - the other table columns or frames may change
size but the column containing the images should stay put.
If the entire table or frameset size is less than 640 X 480 pixels - this
will fit on the lowest resolution monitor.

Chris


----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Cooper" <mcooper@cast.org>
To: "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 10:38 AM
Subject: RE: Technique 3.4.1 Check document for relative units of measure


> For Bobby, I went through the HTML spec and we've only implemented the
> requirement to have relative size units for those elements that support
> them. When we originally had it for any size attribute, every table
border,
> cellspacing, cellpadding, etc. attribute got called out, even width and
> height for images!. But in HTML, there are no relative sizes you can
define
> for those attributes. In CSS, there are (and by the way, you can use a
> fractional em, like "border: .1em"), so if we were evaluating CSS I would
> say border, padding, margin etc. should be covered.
>
> The only elements and attributes we check for absolute size, then, are:
>
> COL - width, charoff
> COLGROUP - width, charoff
> HR - width
> FRAMESET - rows, cols
> IFRAME - width, height
> TABLE - width
> TBODY - charoff
> TH - width, height, charoff
> TFOOT - charoff
> THEAD - charoff
> TD - width, height, charoff
> TR - height, charoff
>
> Michael
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-er-ig-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-wai-er-ig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Chris Ridpath
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:07 PM
> To: WAI ER IG List
> Subject: Technique 3.4.1 Check document for relative units of measure
>
>
> Could the 'border' attribute be an exception to this rule? It's a common
> practice to use 1 or 2 for a table/image/frame border to indicate that
there
> should be some sort of thin line surrounding the object. If we do require
a
> relative measure for a border, what would it be? (I think that an 'em' or
> 'ex' would be too large to replace a 1 pixel border.)
>
> Chris
>
>

Received on Thursday, 28 September 2000 12:00:42 UTC