|
|
Posted by dorayme on 07/24/07 00:40
In article <slrnfaaa9l.l10.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
> On 2007-07-23, dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > In article <he%oi.10846$4A1.4015@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
> > "rf" <rf@invalid.com> wrote:
> >
> >> dorayme, where are you now?
> >
> > Generally buried in work with deadlines, specifically grappling
> > with a table whose rows will not even roughly be height evened.
> >
> > (Know anything about getting a table to be this and nicely enough
> > cross browser? Have not a clue what I am talking about? Why not?
> > Are you refusing to imagine my problem? Is the call for a url
> > welling up in your brain? There is a ruddy great picture of an
> > item in a left column that spans 7 rows, and the 7 rows of
> > remaining columns are just very short text and number strings but
> > the last row of these latter takes up about 3/4 of the space.
> > Looks ugly while being semantically beautiful.
>
> I tried this and it comes out OK in most browsers, but not Konqueror,
> aka Safari, in which the first few rows get their content height and the
> last one gets the rest, which sounds like what you're describing.
>
You are not wrong. I have been looking in Safari and when it
looks right there, I move on to other browsers. Even a martian
has to start somewhere. <g>
> If you don't know the height of the big item on the left then I don't
> know what you can do about that.
>
> Rowspan and colspan make table formatting much more complicated than it
> would otherwise be, so it might be more predictable to use nested
> tables, and there is an easy solution there if you know the height of
> the left item.
>
Funny you should mention this! I just finished roughly this
tactic (as you go on to describe) on one of the many tables I
have to do and it sort of solved the problem. (I don't quite know
the height of the cell with the pic as it has a tiny bit of html
text underneath. I tried for the inner table:
<table style="width:100%;height:100%">
And this took up the space fine in Safari.
But I have an uncomfortable feeling about it. The site I am
updating has been moving slowly for years in a certain simpler
and better direction and this takes it a step backwards into
complexity. But if it has to be, it has to be. I might have to
take the pics out of the table and float them left next to a then
easy to manage regular table (there is a small complication that
stops me rushing to this solution but I won't bore you with the
details)
Thanks, Ben, for the input.
--
dorayme
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|