Damnit, Ben...

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #53,223 by inthane-chan 9/25/02 4:09:01 PM Reply	Damnit, Ben... Don'tcha know they want you to use inline framesets for table display? Get with the program, man! ;) End of world rescheduled for day after tomorrow. Something should probably be done. Please advise.
Post #53,231 by drewk 9/25/02 4:40:42 PM Reply	Oh yeah I remember hearing that. Having scrollable sections within tables does sound handy. But the table syntax should be maintained as an extension to the frame API. === Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #53,238 by inthane-chan 9/25/02 5:03:12 PM Reply	/me pagefaults. Yer kiddin' me - they actually WERE recommending that? SMACK BOUNCE THUD End of world rescheduled for day after tomorrow. Something should probably be done. Please advise.
Post #53,259 by ben_tilly 9/25/02 6:40:12 PM Reply	Aren't you thinking of div tags? What Inthane was talking about are embedded web pages that are sent separately. Using that to produce a table would be insane. Cheers, Ben "Career politicians are inherently untrustworthy; if it spends its life buzzing around the outhouse, it\ufffds probably a fly." - [link\|http://www.nationalinterest.org/issues/58/Mead.html\|Walter Mead]
Post #53,303 by drewk 9/26/02 8:53:01 AM Reply	Hmm, I think that would be an implementation issue If the spec calls for scrollable, collapsible regions within tables, which I know I read about, they would look just like iframes. Given that, I'm assuming browser makers would recycle the same code they use to render iframes. So while the contents of the iframe wouldn't be loaded from another URL but from a specified block element within the page, the rendering would be the same. === Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978\|Andrew Grygus]

Question re: CSS and tables - (drewk) - (20) - Sept. 24, 2002, 12:48:56 PM EDT

That's the way it used to be... - (ChrisR) - (11) - Sept. 24, 2002, 03:54:23 PM EDT

That would be stupid - (drewk) - (10) - Sept. 24, 2002, 04:47:59 PM EDT

Tables are the poor man's layout control - (ChrisR) - (9) - Sept. 24, 2002, 05:06:43 PM EDT

Not really - (drewk) - Sept. 24, 2002, 05:27:13 PM EDT

Like most purists then... - (ben_tilly) - (7) - Sept. 24, 2002, 08:19:03 PM EDT

Damnit, Ben... - (inthane-chan) - (4) - Sept. 25, 2002, 04:09:01 PM EDT

Oh yeah - (drewk) - (3) - Sept. 25, 2002, 04:40:42 PM EDT

/me pagefaults. - (inthane-chan) - Sept. 25, 2002, 05:03:12 PM EDT

Aren't you thinking of div tags? - (ben_tilly) - (1) - Sept. 25, 2002, 06:40:12 PM EDT

Hmm, I think that would be an implementation issue - (drewk) - Sept. 26, 2002, 08:53:01 AM EDT

I don't think that's the issue - (tseliot) - (1) - Sept. 26, 2002, 12:03:01 PM EDT

But it is - (ben_tilly) - Sept. 26, 2002, 08:32:21 PM EDT

Seems to work - (ChrisR) - (1) - Sept. 24, 2002, 09:13:50 PM EDT

D'oh! Guess what? - (drewk) - Sept. 25, 2002, 09:27:00 AM EDT

That's how it has been implemented. - (static) - Sept. 25, 2002, 02:25:12 AM EDT

If you target newer browsers: - (tseliot) - (4) - Sept. 25, 2002, 12:46:59 PM EDT

Thak you thank you thank you thank you thank you - (drewk) - (3) - Sept. 25, 2002, 01:03:36 PM EDT

W3C's CSS spec.... - (kmself) - (1) - Sept. 25, 2002, 01:20:09 PM EDT

Thanks____________and ... gaaah, that's dense reading -NT - (drewk) - Sept. 25, 2002, 02:23:34 PM EDT

CSS2 + Eric Meyer aka God - (tseliot) - Sept. 26, 2002, 11:56:45 AM EDT

iwethey.org

Your occasional fulminations are spicy & crunchy too.
54 ms