- From: Glenn Linderman <v+html@g.nevcal.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:44:39 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4DAFC447.4020505@g.nevcal.com>
On 4/20/2011 10:01 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 4/21/11 12:39 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote: >> I see! So that explains why the sample I sent looks the way it does... >> the intrinsic width is calculated, the container is set to that size, >> the height is too big, and so the scrollbar is added, which subtracts >> from the space available for the content, so it gets even taller, and >> multiple lines are used per cell even though there is plenty of blank >> space to the right. > > Yes, that is exactly what happens. Thanks for sticking with me until I understand it. Produces pretty sad results. Chrome does the same, apparently. Opera and IE do better. Dunno about the rest. Alan demonstrated what appears to be a hack depending on current but non-standard behavior that improves the results. Helpful until something changes. This is why we web authors need to do browser brand and version sniffing, because to get pleasing results, we have to go into areas that are not standardized. In _this_ case, code can be written that happens to work similarly enough in 5 browsers (per Alan, I don't have Safari installed here), that it seems that brand and version sniffing is not necessary for current browser versions... but I don't know if that picture changes if more browser brands are tested, and as soon as one of them changes something in their non-standard-prescribed behavior, such may be necessary, or a wholesale rewrite of the CSS for this case. Having a simple CSS way to sniff browser brands and versions would make me feel a lot more comfortable with using Alan's hack. And, of course, none of this addresses keeping the headers and footers visible while scrolling.
Received on Thursday, 21 April 2011 05:45:12 UTC