need help with display

M

mcnewsxp

the bottom table on this page looks ok in IE but not firefox or chrome:

login in with test test at

http://stellarschoolservices.org/

click the SCHEDULE link

TherapistsScheduler.aspx

i am actual trying to make the <td>s the same size across the page.

how to fix?

tia,
mcnewsxp
 
D

dorayme

mcnewsxp said:
the bottom table on this page looks ok in IE but not firefox or chrome:

login in with test test at

http://stellarschoolservices.org/

click the SCHEDULE link

TherapistsScheduler.aspx

i am actual trying to make the <td>s the same size across the page.

how to fix?

If you really want, for some reason, to use a table this way and have
the cells go down (rather than across as usual) but just want the text
to fit in and all cells to look the same size: try something like
width: 8em; and no height or a min-height (in px if you must! but best
not)
 
B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

Who are these rapists you want to schedule???
If you really want, for some reason, to use a table this way and have
the cells go down (rather than across as usual) but just want the text
to fit in and all cells to look the same size: try something like width:
8em; and no height or a min-height (in px if you must! but best not)

I'm wondering why he just doesn't use four <tr>, each with one <td>
instead of trying to vertically fudge the display of a single row?
Wouldn't that be a lot more logical?
 
R

richard

Who are these rapists you want to schedule???


I'm wondering why he just doesn't use four <tr>, each with one <td>
instead of trying to vertically fudge the display of a single row?
Wouldn't that be a lot more logical?

You just don't get it.
There are 10 people in a line doing synchronous excercising.
Except for one.
And he says, "How come you guys can't get your act together?"
 
B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

richard said:
You just don't get it.

I get it just fine, bullis.
There are 10 people in a line doing synchronous excercising. Except for
one.
And he says, "How come you guys can't get your act together?"

Is that a quote of something someone posted about you? If anyone is the
"odd man out" it is you.
 
D

dorayme

Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:
Who are these rapists you want to schedule???


I'm wondering why he just doesn't use four <tr>, each with one <td>
instead of trying to vertically fudge the display of a single row?
Wouldn't that be a lot more logical?

In a temporary experiment in attitude to the world, I resist
wondering. Of course, you are right, it is a puzzle but perhaps we
should not pry too much. There may be a reason, it may be something
very personal: a geek beauty might have said, "Darling, I will marry
you, if you dare to use a table in the most longitudinal manner"?

Maybe he is being threatened: "If you ever, EVER, use an HTML table in
a normal way, you will shot!"?

It may just be some sort of zen garden challenge where he cannot or
would rather not get his hands on the HTML?

Maybe the HTML is generated from a script and tables are the easiest
to generate in his situation?

What is this business of scheduling rapists? Scheduling as mental
illness certification? Or setting them up to rape in an orderly
manner, by appointment?
 
M

mcnewsxp

If you really want, for some reason, to use a table this way and have
the cells go down (rather than across as usual) but just want the text
to fit in and all cells to look the same size: try something like
width: 8em; and no height or a min-height (in px if you must! but best
not)

my dear html experts - i am not trying to *make* it go vertical. it goes horizontl just fine in IE, but not firefox or chrome. it goes down. i don't want it to go down. i want to why it goes down so i can fix it.

can yez pleez hep me or not.....?
 
M

mcnewsxp

Who are these rapists you want to schedule???


I'm wondering why he just doesn't use four <tr>, each with one <td>
instead of trying to vertically fudge the display of a single row?
Wouldn't that be a lot more logical?

please - i said 'across the page' not down the page. it displays as i wish in IE, but not firefox. i'm doing something dumb, but don't know what.
 
M

mcnewsxp

the bottom table on this page looks ok in IE but not firefox or chrome:

login in with test test at

http://stellarschoolservices.org/

click the SCHEDULE link

TherapistsScheduler.aspx

i am actual trying to make the <td>s the same size across the page.

how to fix?

tia,
mcnewsxp

amazing!
just changing height from px to em did the trick. wonder why?
 
D

dorayme

mcnewsxp said:
my dear html experts - i am not trying to *make* it go vertical. it goes
horizontl just fine in IE, but not firefox or chrome. it goes down. i don't
want it to go down. i want to why it goes down so i can fix it.

can yez pleez hep me or not.....?

Are you not getting my posts on this? I suggested for you to remove
display: block from td.tdBod days back when you posted under the
thread with a name like "table td question". I have also made other
remarks that you might find useful about using em rather than px.

This is the first time, by the way, that you have clearly said that
you don't want the cells to go down.
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

mcnewsxp said:
my dear html experts - i am not trying to *make* it go vertical. it goes horizontl just fine in IE, but not firefox or chrome. it goes down. i don't want it to go down. i want to why it goes down so i can fix it.

can yez pleez hep me or not.....?



I didn't see it. Aside of IE's lack of CSS support of rounded borders it
look basically the same to me.


<http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/sss-ie-ff>
 
M

mcnewsxp

Are you not getting my posts on this? I suggested for you to remove
display: block from td.tdBod days back when you posted under the
thread with a name like "table td question". I have also made other
remarks that you might find useful about using em rather than px.

This is the first time, by the way, that you have clearly said that
you don't want the cells to go down.

i took the block out right away. the em thing didn't make sense because i see a lot of people using px for td size. but i was obviously wrong. and you were not the only one to mention the em thing.

first time - not really. if you looked at the page in IE you'd have seen it going across and i said i wanted it to look like it does in IE.

so whatever...

thanks for the help.
 
D

dorayme

Some mention was made, iirc, about having the cells the same size. You
can achieve this, but there are no guarantees across all browsers,
depending on how you width the table family elements and the nature of
your content. To take two simple cases, if you don't width your table
element, leaving it at its default auto and give sufficient width to
the TD elements for content to wrap,
 
D

dorayme

dorayme said:
Some mention was made, iirc, about having the cells the same size. You
can achieve this, but there are no guarantees across all browsers,
depending on how you width the table family elements and the nature of
your content. To take two simple cases, if you don't width your table
element, leaving it at its default auto and give sufficient width to
the TD elements for content to wrap,
....

er... that was sent in mid composition by accident!

The other simple case was where you give a percentage width to the
cells, as many as needed, to make up the whole, in this case, you
don't need to set a width to the table element.

But really, there are too many variables in these matters to summarise
a set of simple rules that most people will easily remember. The
presence of borders, paddings, margins, unexpected user text sizes,
can throw off a lot of these calculations and expectations.

The truth is that it is very much better not to be bothered about, not
to want, such precision, to let tables find their own ways, to dictate
as little as possible about widths and heights. The browser not only
is often likely to do a more reasonable user friendly layout all on
its own but can ignore your widths and heights with no particular
censure from HTML specifications.

It goes against the whole idea of flexibility and fluidity and
adaptability to try to force equal width cells across. It is often
simply a waste of space (because small content does not need to be as
wide as bigger content) in pursuit of an overly simplistic aesthetic.
 

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