more css problems with scrolling table

D

dorayme

richard said:
http://mroldies.net/scrolltable3.html

I worked on this to ensure the columnas in the two tables matched.
I changed the data to show the proper items and now the columns do not
match.

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//Dli HTML 4.01 liansitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/li/html4/loose.dli">

er...

at least try

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

if not

<!DOCTYPE html>


You have

<ul><ul>Rank</li><ul>Song ID</li></ul>

The first child of a UL should be a LI, no?

As to the matching, why not just keep it simple and have one table?
 
R

richard

R

richard

http://mroldies.net/scrolltable3.html

I worked on this to ensure the columnas in the two tables matched.
I changed the data to show the proper items and now the columns do not
match.

Why?

after a test, it appears that a simple table has limits.
with only a few rows it works fine.
with several hundred rows, it does not.
so now I have to find where to split it.
 
T

Tim Streater

richard said:
after a test, it appears that a simple table has limits.
with only a few rows it works fine.
with several hundred rows, it does not.
so now I have to find where to split it.

Unlikely. Some of my tables have 10,000 rows in them.
 
D

Denis McMahon

after a test, it appears that a simple table has limits.
with only a few rows it works fine.
with several hundred rows, it does not.
so now I have to find where to split it.

This is usually caused by broken "tag soup". I recall another contributor
who had a similar problem when his documents exceeded a certain size, the
issue was that he was interleaving some combination of font, bold, center
and p elements, and the effect of his doing so was to create a document
tree so large that some browsers could not handle it in the available
memory.

So, first of all, run the html through the validator and make sure it's
not broken.
 
D

Doug Miller

http://mroldies.net/scrolltable3.html

I worked on this to ensure the columnas in the two tables matched.
I changed the data to show the proper items and now the columns do not
match.

Why?

Ya think it might have anything to do with this?

Errors found while checking this document as -//W3C//Dli HTML 4.01 liansitional//EN!
Result: 7286 Errors, 1 warning(s)

Unusual, even for you.

Hint: proofread, proofread, proofread. Especially your DOCTYPE declaration. (What type
is "liansitional", anyway?)
 
N

Norman Peelman

after a test, it appears that a simple table has limits.
with only a few rows it works fine.
with several hundred rows, it does not.
so now I have to find where to split it.

#1 - Your DOCTYPE is still screwed up which is a direct result of you
Find/replacing TAG elements.
#2 - just looking at 'View Source' in Firefox I can see that you have
closing </li> tags with no opening <li> tags, and some others.
#3 - If you would include line breaks in appropriate places your HTML
output would be much easier to read. ie: after closing tags for starters.
#4 - I f you want your table cells to match width then you will need to
size them accordingly, they won't magically match.
 
R

richard

Ya think it might have anything to do with this?

Errors found while checking this document as -//W3C//Dli HTML 4.01 liansitional//EN!
Result: 7286 Errors, 1 warning(s)

Unusual, even for you.

Hint: proofread, proofread, proofread. Especially your DOCTYPE declaration. (What type
is "liansitional", anyway?)

it's swahili for "fucked up!".
what page did you validate?
BTW, validating did not cure the offsetting problem.
 
D

Doug Miller

it's swahili for "fucked up!".

So if you know it's fucked up, why haven't you fixed it?
what page did you validate?

The one whose URL you gave, obviously: http://mroldies.net/scrolltable3.html
BTW, validating did not cure the offsetting problem.

Well, no, it wouldn't. Validating doesn't fix anything. Fixing the errors that validating uncovers
might fix some of your problems, but you haven't done that yet: the validator still shows 7286
errors, and your DOCTYPE declaration is still broken.
 
N

Norman Peelman

Ya think it might have anything to do with this?

Errors found while checking this document as -//W3C//Dli HTML 4.01 liansitional//EN!
Result: 7286 Errors, 1 warning(s)

Unusual, even for you.

Hint: proofread, proofread, proofread. Especially your DOCTYPE declaration. (What type
is "liansitional", anyway?)

You'll notice that he has inadvertently searched/replaced 'tr' and
'td' with 'li'.
 
D

Denis McMahon

#1 - Your DOCTYPE is still screwed up which is a direct result of you
Find/replacing TAG elements.

I'm not convinced that Richard has progressed beyond the "any doctype
will do" mentality that he has previously exhibited to actually
understanding that the html markup must match the doctype if he wants
cross browser consistency.
#2 - just looking at 'View Source' in Firefox I can see that you have
closing </li> tags with no opening <li> tags, and some others.

That would be the broken tag soup I was referring to earlier then.
#3 - If you would include line breaks in appropriate places your HTML
output would be much easier to read. ie: after closing tags for
starters.

But if people can read his html they might copy it ....

From his pov, he doesn't want his precious html stolen. From our pov, we
don't want people using his html as an example of how to write html.
#4 - If you want your table cells to match width then you will need to
size them accordingly, they won't magically match.

I'm guessing he's using multiple tables and each table is auto allocating
column widths. This should be fixable with css using:

table tr td:first-child {width:n px} /* col 1 */
table tr td:first-child + td {width:n px} /* col 2 */
table tr td:first-child + td + td {width:n px} /* col 3 */
table tr td:first-child + td + td + td {width:n px} /* col 4 */

..... continuing the "+ td" chain for each additional column

It might look a bit fiddly as css, but it saves having to mess about with
the table markup at all.

Of course, fixing it with CSS will require that his doctype and his markup
match each other so that all browsers can apply the css to a consistent
dom, rather than their browser specific handling of any broken markup.
 
N

Norman Peelman

I'm not convinced that Richard has progressed beyond the "any doctype
will do" mentality that he has previously exhibited to actually
understanding that the html markup must match the doctype if he wants
cross browser consistency.


That would be the broken tag soup I was referring to earlier then.


But if people can read his html they might copy it ....

From his pov, he doesn't want his precious html stolen. From our pov, we
don't want people using his html as an example of how to write html.


I'm guessing he's using multiple tables and each table is auto allocating
column widths. This should be fixable with css using:

table tr td:first-child {width:n px} /* col 1 */
table tr td:first-child + td {width:n px} /* col 2 */
table tr td:first-child + td + td {width:n px} /* col 3 */
table tr td:first-child + td + td + td {width:n px} /* col 4 */

..... continuing the "+ td" chain for each additional column

It might look a bit fiddly as css, but it saves having to mess about with
the table markup at all.

Of course, fixing it with CSS will require that his doctype and his markup
match each other so that all browsers can apply the css to a consistent
dom, rather than their browser specific handling of any broken markup.

I have repeatedly attempted to show him how to generate *readable*
HTML output. If he could read it then he could spot some errors.
 
D

Doug Miller

Norman Peelman said:
I have repeatedly attempted to show him how to generate *readable*
HTML output. If he could read it then he could spot some errors.

Unwarranted assumption on your part. I don't believe his ability to spot errors is affected to any
measurable degree by the readability of the code.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,482
Members
44,901
Latest member
Noble71S45

Latest Threads

Top