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. Chris
|
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....
|
|
