- From: Tim Bagot <tsb@earth.li>
- Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 15:23:26 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Style Sheet mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On Sat, 5 Jun 1999, Braden N. McDaniel wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Chris Karnaze <karnaze@netscape.com> > To: <www-style@w3.org> > Sent: Friday, June 04, 1999 2:16 PM > Subject: table backgrounds > > > > Should the background of a table row be visible in the cell spacing of > > the row? Neither Nav4.5 nor IE5 do it this way, which seems wrong. > > > > Same question for table columns? > > I think so. > > But then the question becomes: if a row and column specify different > backgrounds, which wins? Who's on top? > > I'd suggest that it makes the most sense to put the columns on "bottom" with > row groups and rows on top of them. While this proposal is largely arbitrary > (it just seems most intuitive to me this way), a possible rationale is that > COL and COLGROUP come before the rows in the table description. This is in fact what happens with CSS2. It is defined in section 17.5.1 of the CSS2 recommendation (<URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/tables.html#table-layers>). I assume that this behaviour can be modified with the z-index property. Tim Bagot
Received on Saturday, 5 June 1999 11:22:44 UTC