|
|
Posted by Bruce C. Miller on 02/14/07 13:32
On Feb 13, 5:30 pm, dorayme <doraymeRidT...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> In article
> <1171397475.393266.205...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Bruce C. Miller" <bm3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Take a look at this html page:
>
> > <html>
> > <body>
>
> > <TABLE border=1 WIDTH="100%">
>
> > <TR>
> > <TD WIDTH="1">1</TD>
> > <TD WIDTH="1">2</TD>
> > <TD>333</TD>
> > <TD>444</TD>
> > </TR>
>
> > <TR>
> > <TD COLSPAN="4">hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhffffffffffffffffffffffffffhhhhhhh</
> > TD>
> > </TR>
>
> > </TABLE>
> > </body>
> > </HTML>
>
> > If I pull that up in FF it looks like I want it to (the first and
> > second columns are small), but in IE it expands those columns (it
> > ignores the width=1). How do I tell IE to not automatically make those
> > columns whatever size it wants? It seems to have something to do with
> > the length of content in the COLSPAN-ed row below it, which is pretty
> > stupid.
>
> Have you tried with a doctype,
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
>
> ?
>
> And remove width in the <td...>, it is an error. If necessary
> specify it in css:
>
> td.tiny {width:1em;}
>
> and class the <td>s concerned. If there is a meaningful reason
> apart from the sheer look to so do, then use a more appropriate
> name than my "tiny".
>
> And what is this business of "1"? This means 1px in your code.
> But that is not very sensible, even one character will take up
> more space generally. Poor IE, what is it to do? We all now it is
> a bit challenged. Why strain its brain? Better to use ems as
> above.
>
> And really, is there a good reason so want to constrain things?
> Why not let the widths adjust themselves to the content and the
> browser window? Even remove the width="100%".
>
> Play about with these ideas and let us know if IE then behaves
> more according to your taste (I have not looked at any of the
> Wins IE for a while)
>
> --
> dorayme
Unfortunately, I cannot use strict since this is part of generated
markup produced by a huge n-tier app, most of which ignores strict
syntax. Rewriting the display layer of this to produce proper markup
is something I'd like to see, but would require literally months of
work and testing, and wouldn't be an easy sell to more results-
oriented people :(
Either way, I dislike the idea that the length of the content in the
second row effects the way IE draws the first one. It really
shouldn't, quirks-mode or not. For example, if you change the 2nd
row's content to like 4 characters, IE does exactly what I want it to.
[Back to original message]
|