|
Posted by Olav Tollefsen on July 19, 2004, 10:45 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Take a look at this page:
http://www.webinnovation.no/test/test.htm
Why is the left table with the text "Menu" not 160 pixels as stated in the
HTML code?
Olav
|
|
Posted by Els on July 19, 2004, 8:50 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Olav Tollefsen wrote:
> Take a look at this page:
>
> http://www.webinnovation.no/test/test.htm
>
> Why is the left table with the text "Menu" not 160 pixels
> as stated in the HTML code?
The whole table is 785, and 160 is 1/4.906 of that, roughly 1
fifth. What I see in my browser is your 'menu' being 1 fifth of
the width of the whole table. Can't be bothered to count pixels
though. Too small.
--
Els
http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
|
|
Posted by Olav Tollefsen on July 19, 2004, 11:06 pm
Please log in for more thread options > Olav Tollefsen wrote:
>
> > Take a look at this page:
> >
> > http://www.webinnovation.no/test/test.htm
> >
> > Why is the left table with the text "Menu" not 160 pixels
> > as stated in the HTML code?
>
> The whole table is 785, and 160 is 1/4.906 of that, roughly 1
> fifth. What I see in my browser is your 'menu' being 1 fifth of
> the width of the whole table. Can't be bothered to count pixels
> though. Too small.
Which browser did you test with? It doesn't look OK in IE 6.0. It looks OK
in Mozilla 1.7.1.
Why the big difference for this simple code?
Olav
|
|
Posted by Els on July 19, 2004, 9:26 pm
Please log in for more thread options Olav Tollefsen wrote:
>> Olav Tollefsen wrote:
>>
>> > Take a look at this page:
>> >
>> > http://www.webinnovation.no/test/test.htm
>> >
>> > Why is the left table with the text "Menu" not 160
>> > pixels as stated in the HTML code?
>>
>> The whole table is 785, and 160 is 1/4.906 of that,
>> roughly 1 fifth. What I see in my browser is your 'menu'
>> being 1 fifth of the width of the whole table. Can't be
>> bothered to count pixels though. Too small.
>
> Which browser did you test with? It doesn't look OK in IE
> 6.0. It looks OK in Mozilla 1.7.1.
Firebird. I see the difference now, yes.
> Why the big difference for this simple code?
Maybe it's because you used XHTML doctype, which according to
the Specs and the Validator doesn't support the html width
attribute.
http://tinyurl.com/4yu8l
--
Els
http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
|
|
Posted by Alan J. Flavell on July 19, 2004, 10:21 pm
Please log in for more thread options On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Olav Tollefsen wrote:
> Why the big difference for this simple code?
Looks like an old-fashioned problem for old-fashioned design
techniques. IE has historically done strange things when one mixes
HTML and CSS sizing and units (pixels, percent, implicit).
Why are you declaring this to be XHTML/1.1, when it isn't? - the HTML
validator reports errors, and the CSS validator refuses to even look
at the CSS because of the XHTML errors. It's generally considered a
courtesy on this group to fix syntax errors for oneself before asking
the group for advice on problems.
I would recommend taking away HTML sizing (leave non-CSS-capable
client agents to do their own table sizing - it usually comes out well
enough), and do any CSS sizing in consistent units (usually I'd
recommend percent, unless you have specifically pixel-sized objects to
accommodate).
Even better, don't use tables for layout.
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Problem with TABLE WIDTH | January 5, 2005, 6:53 pm |
| Problem with table 100% width | June 8, 2005, 8:18 am |
| Table Within Table with colspan and width=100% | August 15, 2005, 10:41 am |
| TABLE, cell width.. help | January 5, 2005, 9:52 am |
| Controlling table width | February 27, 2007, 7:33 am |
| Help with table width and CSS relative positioning | July 22, 2004, 11:49 pm |
| Width of table in frame with scrollbar | December 7, 2004, 9:51 pm |
| Table TD width not rendering correctly | March 1, 2005, 1:50 am |
| table width layout problems in IE | May 6, 2005, 7:51 pm |
| Table with 100% width but relative cells? | June 1, 2005, 11:08 am |
|
XML Sitemap