- From: E. Stephen Mack <estephen@emf.net>
- Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 17:56:54 -0700
- To: www-html@w3.org
Regarding TD and TH no longer allowing the WIDTH attribute, At 03:13 PM 7/13/97 +0200, Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet wrote: >Although it wasn't me who removed it ;-), I've always wondered why >you'd want to set the width of *one* cell in a column. I can understand >HEIGHT on a TR, but should WIDTH on, say, the last TD in a column >apply to all earlier cells in that column too? That would require >that the entire table is redrawn. I agree with you here and in your later comments; one of the main drawbacks to cell widths is that it requires a two-pass algorithm to display a table. However, since the HTML 4.0 spec does keep the two-pass algorithm (and even has notes how to implement it), the big drawback to not letting TD and TH take a WIDTH attribute is that many existing tables for HTML 3.2 are no longer valid HTML 4.0 documents. Since one goal of the new table model is backwards-compatibility, I'm trying to understand why we need to remove the WIDTH attribute now. I could understand it better if the two-pass algorithm were no longer in use. * * * One possible motivation is, as Arnoud suggests, the possibility that cell widths were removed in the current HTML version so that they could be reintroduced in a future version of HTML that allows different rows to use different widths for each cells. <TABLE border> <TR> <TD WIDTH=100>Foo <TD WIDTH=200>Bar <TR> <TD WIDTH=50>Feebie <TD WIDTH=250>Bletch </TABLE> might one day result in: +------------------+---------------------------------------+ | Foo | Bar | +---------+--------+---------------------------------------+ | Feebie | Bletch | +---------+------------------------------------------------+ Given how complex the table model already is and the degree of complexity required for browser algorithms, I'm not sure if we want to open this can of worms any time soon. I can't off-hand think of any tables that would require this format for structural reasons. However, some spreadsheet models (although not Excel's) and some word processing table models (notably Word's) already include these types of mixed-cell-width tables. Also, these types of tables can be duplicated (inelegantly) by using two different tables, one after another; or by dividing the table into three columns and judiciously using COLSPAN if you aren't set on any particular column width. * * * Anyway, the main point I wanted to bring up is that many existing HTML 3.2 tables are no longer compatible with the 4.0 table model because they specify a WIDTH attribute for a cell. -- E. Stephen Mack <estephen@emf.net> http://www.emf.net/~estephen/
Received on Sunday, 13 July 1997 20:56:02 UTC