[source lang=HTML]
<table width=775 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 border=0>
<tr>
<td colspan=4></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan=21></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan=4></td>
</tr>
</table>
[web] HTML: Layout with Tables [resolved]
Author
I sketched my website layout to scale, on graphing paper, so that designing the table to hold my website would be easier (my whole website is a giant hidden table, basically). Anyways, the problem is, I'm not exactly sure how the browser interprets tables.
Here's the top row of my website (listed by widths of the cells, in pixels):
100; 25; 525; 25; 100
That's what I want it to be, anyways. All the cells are empty at the moment. My actual website looks nothing like the intended widths.
Here's my table:
My hope was, the browser would do the math here like so: add up all colspans, divide by table width, and that would the standard cell width.
What would be the right way to do this?
[Edited by - v0dKA on September 11, 2004 10:47:58 PM]
You can just do <td width="25">
Learning CSS is a worthy goal, though.
You can never tell the browser what to do, you can only advise it. The browser is unlikely (I don't think any do) to add up the colspans and divide by the number. A browser would move the colspan boundaries freely depending on content.
What you wanted was:
Using CSS gives you more control, more flexibility and cleaner fallback.
Learning CSS is a worthy goal, though.
You can never tell the browser what to do, you can only advise it. The browser is unlikely (I don't think any do) to add up the colspans and divide by the number. A browser would move the colspan boundaries freely depending on content.
What you wanted was:
<table width="775"><tr><td width="100"></td><td width="25"></td><td width="525"></td><td width="25"></td><td width="100"></td></tr></table>Using CSS gives you more control, more flexibility and cleaner fallback.
Note that an entirely empty cell won't be draw or measured the way you want. You should make each cell contain at least one non-blank character, such as the non-breaking space (& nbsp ;).
Also, unless your table sets cell padding, spacing and border widths to 0, some overhead will be used for that, rather than cell contents.
Also, unless your table sets cell padding, spacing and border widths to 0, some overhead will be used for that, rather than cell contents.
Author
I need a table layout somewhat like this:
Would that be possible with a single table tag? Note the middle column spans the whole page. That middle column I hoped to be one cell. So, in the first row, can I define a height of the the whole page for that cell? How would the third column be treated in the second row?
Is there a good way to do this?
[Edited by - v0dKA on September 11, 2004 10:05:49 PM]
_______________________________________________________________| | | | | || | | | | ||_________|____| |___|_________|| | | | | ||_________|____| |___|_________|| | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || | | | | |________________________________________________________________Would that be possible with a single table tag? Note the middle column spans the whole page. That middle column I hoped to be one cell. So, in the first row, can I define a height of the the whole page for that cell? How would the third column be treated in the second row?
Is there a good way to do this?
[Edited by - v0dKA on September 11, 2004 10:05:49 PM]
Fired up dreamweaver, and it spit this out at me...
<table width="100%" border="0"> <tr> <td width="100" height="80"> </td> <td width="100"> </td> <td width="" rowspan="3"> </td> <td width="100"> </td> <td width="100"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="26"> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="285"> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr></table>
Author
Quote:Original post by Katta
Fired up dreamweaver, and it spit this out at me...
*** Source Snippet Removed ***
Ahh, right, the rowspan. Forgot about that.
Don't use tables for a master layout. Just don't. Use frames if you have to, because frames were intended for that sort of thing. Tables are for representing tabular data.
If you have to, nest tables instead of using one monolithic table to create a specific layout. This makes it easier to replace tables with layers as needed, and makes the table structure easier to understand.
[Edited by - igni ferroque on September 12, 2004 6:51:51 PM]
If you have to, nest tables instead of using one monolithic table to create a specific layout. This makes it easier to replace tables with layers as needed, and makes the table structure easier to understand.
[Edited by - igni ferroque on September 12, 2004 6:51:51 PM]
Quote:Original post by igni ferroque
Don't use tables for a master layout. Just don't. Use frames if you have to, because frames were intended for that sort of thing. Tables are for representing tabular data.
If you have to, nest tables instead of using one monolithic table to create a specific layout. This makes it easier to replace tables with layers as needed, and makes the table structure easier to understand.
ACtually, tables are the only way to ensure boxability (word?), meaning that the boxes stay aligned like in the forums here. You look on the index page for the forums and you'll see however big one datum might be, the entire row spans that height. Doing htis with divs will prove to be very..very difficult.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
