- From: Rastislav Graus <rastislav.graus@arsnova.sk>
- Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 08:21:19 +0200
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Ian Hickson wrote: > > The problem is solve is: Given this HTML markup snippet: > > <table> > <colgroup> > <col id="a"> > <col id="b"> > <col id="c"> > </colgroup> > <tr> > <td id="d"> > <td id="e"> > <td id="f"> > </tr> > <tr> > <td id="g" colspan="2"> > <td id="h"> > </tr> > </table> > > ...and this CSS: > > #b { display: none; } > #a { color: purple; } > #c { color: blue; } > > ...find a way to ensure that d and g end up purple and e ends up blue, > with f and h remaining unstyled. > > How does your proposal solve this? I'm author and I'm new to this forum, so may be I don't see all particularity of this discusion, but ... I hear here two voices: first says, that the table model in CSS don't response to that one in HTML and the secont, that the properties in COL can't be simply inherited to the cells because of examle above. I don't understand one point of the discusion. When we concur, that the properties from COL element have to impact on cells, then why display none only ignore the coll element and not all the cells in the column. By me is the definition of display for COL wrong. Haw I see it the example above have to be a table with two rows: row 1: d in purple, f in blue row 2: g in purple (only in 1st column, the second isn't displayed), h in blue I see one more alternative - the cell g is completely not displayed. -- ====================================================================== Rastislav Graus mailto:rastislav.graus@arsnova.sk ARS NOVA spol s r.o. http://www.arsnova.sk Hradná 10 voice:+421 2 6545 8045 SK-841 10 Bratislava fax:+421 2 6545 9103 ======================================================================
Received on Monday, 5 April 2004 02:21:43 UTC