Re: function and impacts (was: @scope and @headers reform)

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:52:50 +0200, Ben Millard  
<cerbera@projectcerbera.com> wrote:

> James Graham wrote:
>> That suggests that the automatic association should only occur if the  
>> header has
>> the a row/colspan (depending on the direction we are looking along)  
>> that is
>> greater than or equal to that of the cells it is being associated with.
>
> James Graham wrote:
>> Apparently this was a case that Simon and Ben discussed for the original
>> smart headers algorithm that got lost along the way somewhere. I've  
>> changed
>> it in the table inspector now so that it is handled correctly.
>
> For any interested archeologists, there was discussion about this on  
> #whatwg:
>
> <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20080925#l-601>

I looked through some of your tables and tested it against the newly  
implemented rule.

# [15:46] <zcorpan_> it doesn't work with  
http://projectcerbera.com/web/study/2007/tables/clark2006/06-gui/minimal
# [15:56] <zcorpan_>  
http://projectcerbera.com/web/study/2007/tables/clark2006/19-movies/minimal  
is another case where it fails

It worked correctly for those tables without the newly implemented rule.

Some observations:

    * Those two were columns -- Gez had rows.

    * Those two had the relevant header cells at the top of the table --
      Gez had data cells to the left of the relevant header cells.

I guess we need a bigger sample of tables to know what to do for this  
particular case. Could this pattern of cells be detected by a script?

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software

Received on Friday, 26 September 2008 06:40:29 UTC