On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 00:36:20 +0600, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you mean moving all TFOOTs after TBODYs, so that the HTML 4.01
placement would be forbidden?
TFOOT should be allowed before TBODY because it helps progessive
rendering on paged media. I'm not sure if it should be
On Nov 9, 2006, at 13:18, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Not deployed yet.
The table integrity checker is now part of all (X)HTML presets at
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/validator/
There's a pseudo-schema called http://hsivonen.iki.fi/checkers/table/
which isn't a schema but a magic URL that causes the
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
scope= will probably only be allowed for THs. Maybe it should be
REQUIRED for THs that aren't in obvious locations (first row, first
column, or whatever).
Maybe. I think the spec should explicitly define how to determine which
header cells are associated with each
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Oct 27, 2006, at 16:21, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:17:16 +0200, Lachlan Hunt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's fine for document conformance, but what about how browsers
will handle it? Is the spec still going to require browsers to
render
Michel Fortin wrote:
Sometime, presentational information is needed to display a document
correctly, and in those few cases where the presentation is tied to the
content, I think it belongs in the markup. The align attribute, when
used on table cells, covers one of those cases.
I think
On Nov 10, 2006, at 02:12, fantasai wrote:
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Oct 27, 2006, at 16:21, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:17:16 +0200, Lachlan Hunt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's fine for document conformance, but what about how
browsers will handle it? Is the spec still
On Oct 23, 2006, at 21:31, Ian Hickson wrote:
I think it would be good to require table integrity. Specifically I
think
overlapping cells would be a MUST NOT.
Made it an error.
I don't think there's a problem
with missing table cells at the end of rows (i.e. a ragged table is
fine).
Henri Sivonen wrote:
I don't have strong feelings about whether tfoot should be allowed
before, after or either before or after tbodys.
I'd allow before because it's conforming in HTML4 and it works and I'd
allow after because it's quite commonly done that way anyway, and I
can't think of
On Nov 9, 2006, at 16:07, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Since (a b) is equivalent to (a, b)|(b, a), aren't both of those
equivalent as well?
That's one of the limitations of DTDs. :-)
In RELAX NG means a real interleave, so the above equivalence holds
if a and b are terminals but doesn't hold if
On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 17:18:46 +0600, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you mean moving all TFOOTs after TBODYs, so that the HTML 4.01
placement would be forbidden?
TFOOT should be allowed before TBODY because it helps progessive rendering
on paged media. I'm not sure if it should be
On Oct 23, 2006, at 21:31, Ian Hickson wrote:
I think cells extending (via colspan/rowspan) into columns or rows
that
contain no cells other than extended cells should be at least a SHOULD
NOT, maybe a MUST NOT.
Wouldn't it be sufficient and more desirable to require each row to
have at
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Oct 23, 2006, at 21:31, Ian Hickson wrote:
I think cells extending (via colspan/rowspan) into columns or rows that
contain no cells other than extended cells should be at least a SHOULD
NOT, maybe a MUST NOT.
Wouldn't it be sufficient and
On Nov 8, 2006, at 02:59, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Oct 23, 2006, at 21:31, Ian Hickson wrote:
I think cells extending (via colspan/rowspan) into columns or
rows that
contain no cells other than extended cells should be at least a
SHOULD
NOT, maybe a
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:43:10 +0200, Michel Fortin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* align
I don't agree. Yes it is presentational, but data tables can look pretty
crappy if you remove their alignement information. Delegating alignment
to CSS will just make tables harder to read without the
Dear all,even i think that overlapping cells should not be supported, as it would be an encouragement to table based layouts. The specifications not supporting overlapping cells would encourage developers to use table for tabular data only.
-- {Ro}h(a)[n]_-_[P]{rab}(h)u
Ian Hickson wrote:
I think it would be good to require table integrity. Specifically I think
overlapping cells would be a MUST NOT.
That's fine for document conformance, but what about how browsers will
handle it? Is the spec still going to require browsers to render
overlapping cells, or
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:17:16 +0200, Lachlan Hunt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's fine for document conformance, but what about how browsers will
handle it? Is the spec still going to require browsers to render
overlapping cells, or would it be possible to resolve this difference
between
On Oct 27, 2006, at 16:21, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:17:16 +0200, Lachlan Hunt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's fine for document conformance, but what about how browsers
will handle it? Is the spec still going to require browsers to
render overlapping cells, or would
Hi,
From: Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
headers= will have a MUST requirement to point to TH elements in the
same table, and will probably only be allowed on TDs. scope= will
probably only be allowed for THs.
In HTML4, as I understand it, TDs can act as both data cells and header
cells if
On Oct 23, 2006, at 21:31, Ian Hickson wrote:
I think it would be good to require table integrity. Specifically I
think
overlapping cells would be a MUST NOT.
Excellent! Thanks!
It might be interesting to have some sort of testing with the axis
attribute too, or maybe we should drop it.
On Oct 26, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
It might be interesting to have some sort of testing with the axis
attribute too, or maybe we should drop it.
I think it should be dropped due to lack of implementations and use
after being in HTML 4 for years.
It strikes me that the axis
On Aug 29, 2006, at 10:44, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Should one expect HTML table row/column integrity to become an
HTML5 conformance requirement?
My plan is to spend November prototyping conformance checker parts
that don't belong in the parser, don't belong in schemas (RELAX NG or
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Should one expect HTML table row/column integrity to become an HTML5
conformance requirement?
I'd appreciate some indication on what I should expect in this area,
i.e. whether it makes sense to prototype a table integrity checker based
on
Should one expect HTML table row/column integrity to become an HTML5
conformance requirement?
That is, will these tables be non-conforming:
table
trtd rowspan=2/td/tr
/table
table
trtd/td/tr
trtd/tdtd/td/tr
/table
?
(This is something static document authors probably would prefer to
have
24 matches
Mail list logo
