|
Posted by mr_burns on August 20, 2004, 10:11 am
Please log in for more thread options
hi,
is the table percent value for height used for displaying in browsers.
i have a table i want to run to the bottom of the screen so it seemed
best to set the height value to 100%.
when i display the table, it only sizes to the elements nested inside
the table (as if no value for height has been given) and not to the
bottom of the screen. i have also tried appling the height attribute
as a css class but no joy.
the code for the table is:
<table width="667" height="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0" background="images/bg_content.gif">
....and i am viewing it in internet explorer 6. any help would be much
apprecieated. cheers
burnsy
|
|
Posted by Jukka K. Korpela on August 20, 2004, 5:18 pm
Please log in for more thread options
bissatch@yahoo.co.uk (mr_burns) wrote:
> is the table percent value for height used for displaying in browsers.
Maybe. On IE 6, for example, the height attribute in <table> is ignored
in "standards" mode.
> when i display the table, it only sizes to the elements nested inside
> the table (as if no value for height has been given) and not to the
> bottom of the screen. i have also tried appling the height attribute
> as a css class but no joy.
Hints:
a) Buy a new keyboard, with a working shift key.
b) Post the URL
c) Don't use tables for layout.
d) Don't set a fixed width, especially not a large one like 667 (pixels).
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
|
|
Posted by Doug on August 21, 2004, 7:36 am
Please log in for more thread options
Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> c) Don't use tables for layout.
How do you do a (rather complicated) layout without using tables? I've
seen some layouts using CSS, but they are simple. Just a header, a
footer, and to bars on either side of the screen.
It seems as though any thing more complicated would be much more
difficult to do in CSS than it is with tables.
If the answer is CSS, then is there a place I can learn how to use CSS
to do layouts?
-d
|
|
Posted by Els on August 21, 2004, 7:37 am
Please log in for more thread options Doug wrote:
> Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>
>
>> c) Don't use tables for layout.
>
> How do you do a (rather complicated) layout without using
> tables? I've seen some layouts using CSS, but they are
> simple. Just a header, a footer, and to bars on either
> side of the screen.
>
> It seems as though any thing more complicated would be much
> more difficult to do in CSS than it is with tables.
>
> If the answer is CSS, then is there a place I can learn how
> to use CSS to do layouts?
Plenty :-)
http://locusmeus.com/list.html
--
Els
http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
|
|
Posted by DU on August 21, 2004, 5:08 pm
Please log in for more thread options Doug wrote:
>
>
> Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>
>
>> c) Don't use tables for layout.
>
>
> How do you do a (rather complicated) layout without using tables?
Your question is general, abstract, without any specifics, without any
detailed info on the page requirements, webpage context, etc.. It's
impossible to answer really; maybe a book on that question with a few
dozens of examples would cover your question.
I've
> seen some layouts using CSS, but they are simple.
No url. No concrete example. So it's kinda hard to understand and see
what you are talking about, referring to.
Just a header, a
> footer, and to bars on either side of the screen.
>
> It seems as though any thing more complicated would be much more
> difficult to do in CSS than it is with tables.
>
> If the answer is CSS,
What was the question actually? If a table is best used for rendering
tabular data, then there is no need to use tables for layout actually no
matter how complex it is. You have to design considering accessibility
too and how a page layout will degrade in other media, applications,
softwares, user agents not supporting CSS and/or scripts.
then is there a place I can learn how to use CSS
> to do layouts?
>
> -d
>
Today, I went to
http://office.microsoft.com/assistance/preview.aspx?AssetID=HA010846721033&CTT=98
page and posted this as a comment/feedback that there info
("Create a structured page layout by using layout tables and cells.")
was wrong. Here's what i posted over there :
Why tables for layout is stupid: problems defined, solutions offered
http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/
Tableless layout HOWTO:
http://www.w3.org/2002/03/csslayout-howto
CSS Layout Techniques: Look Ma, No Tables.
http://glish.com/css/
Throwing Tables Out the Window:
http://www.stopdesign.com/articles/throwing_tables/
62% file size reduction by removing table design in microsoft.com homepage!
"At 40 KB, the HTML for Microsoft's home page is not exactly a bloated
beast. But it is burdened with inaccessible, kludgy, table-based markup
filled with proprietary attributes and some awkward JavaScript. (...)
Current Design Makeover
HTML file size 40 KB 15 KB
File size reduction - 62%"
Clean tableless design saves more than 50% of file size
http://www.atipico.com.br/en/servicos.asp
DU
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | div tag with height in percentage | March 5, 2008, 6:04 am |
| Problem with table width? | July 19, 2004, 10:45 pm |
| Table widths problem | October 6, 2004, 11:40 pm |
| Problem with TABLE WIDTH | January 5, 2005, 6:53 pm |
| table alignment problem | January 30, 2005, 10:48 pm |
| Problem with table 100% width | June 8, 2005, 8:18 am |
| Problem With Button In Table | September 2, 2005, 12:08 pm |
| Re: html table problem | February 6, 2006, 5:59 pm |
| table: valign-top problem | February 15, 2008, 3:50 pm |
| Table layout problem in Firefox/IE6 | June 14, 2005, 8:42 am |
|
XML Sitemap