- From: Anne van Kesteren (fora) <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 07:14:09 +0200
- To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, www-style@w3.org
>> No, with the table layout algorithm (as implemented by UAs) >> width:100% means "make this column as wide as possible given the >> constraints of the other columns". > > Letter 's' in your 'UAs' is just mistyping I guess. Only Mozilla is > trying to render them properly (from Mozilla point of of view). Yep, > 'cause "given the constraints of the other columns" has strong smell > of fuzzy logic. Ever heard about Opera and Safari? >> This is actually very poorly described by CSS2 right now, largely >> because nobody actually understands the table layout algorithm, >> which makes it one of the worst parts of CSS. Most implementations >> are developed by reverse engineering the more popular >> implementations. > > In my opinion this happened because table*-styles are "artificial" > entities. Brave attempt to close holes. They conflict with e.g. box > model. They create too many "if", "then", "except" across the whole > specification. No. The model described is very solid. It sucks, but at least it is solid, something you can't say from your proposal. > Lack of %% natural "fluid" mechanism in CSS was the main motivation > to introduce them I guess. Not at all. They were introduced to describe the TABLE element and descendents with CSS, so that one could visually style a table in XML as well. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Monday, 10 May 2004 01:15:29 UTC