Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11 , register , free tools , login , search , subscribe , help , library , announcements , recent posts , open posts Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
relative tables in-side fixed tables cpnmm msg:596795 6:23 am on Nov 3, 2004 (gmt 0) Hi,
I'm struggling with a design on my site. I'm using an open source content management system.
On some of the pages it generates HTML that has a relative size table (100%) inside a static size layout table.
Whenever one of these pages is displayed the relative table seems to push the cell it's in so it is bigger than it should be which squashed the other cells causing the design to break.
Does anyone know why this would happen.
Thanks very much.
tedster msg:596796 6:56 am on Nov 3, 2004 (gmt 0)
A "static" table size is only interpreted by the browser as something like a strong suggestion. But the number cannot be held to rigidly by the browser's rendering engine, or else authors could create valid code that is, nevertheless, impossible. That would crash the browser.
So the way out for any browser's internal code is that if the content needs to push the static table beyond its stated dimensions, then it's allowed to.
You probably need to re-think the template - or perhaps place stricter controls on what content can be placed inside your inner, relatively sized table.
cpnmm msg:596797 7:48 am on Nov 3, 2004 (gmt 0)
Thanks for replying Tedster.
The problem is that even when there is no content in the 100% nested table, it still stretches the static table. I really don't understand why this should happen.
I could see that if I had a graphic that was larger than static width should allow it would stretch but not if there wasn't anything in there.
I think I must have made a mistake somewhere but I can't see it.
tedster msg:596798 8:12 am on Nov 3, 2004 (gmt 0)
When in doubt, try the W3C validator [ validator.w3.org]
Also make sure you don't have any margins or padding on that 100% table.
cpnmm msg:596799 8:29 am on Nov 3, 2004 (gmt 0)
I'm using a cellspacing attribute that I think may be causing the problems. I wasn't taking this into account when working out the size of the columns...
I think I need a coffee....