Subject: Re: [xsl] FO Table widths - table-layout fixed behaviour and use From: Tony Graham <Tony.Graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:04:43 +0100 |
On Tue, Jul 22 2008 18:21:36 +0100, kstubs@xxxxxxxxx wrote: ... > Hence, the folowing would be > valid and would result in a 5 inch wide table: > > <fo:table table-layout="fixed"> You need to add an inline-progression-dimension or width property. > Would this be correct? So far, I have not had luck with table-layout > fixed tables, all of my tables are just 100% width, and the column > widths do not seem to match my fixed width values consistently (maybe > not at all). I have also tried the above by laying down table-column > elements with a width. If you don't specify a non-auto inline-progression-dimension value, the initial value of 'auto' means that automatic table layout is happening anyway [1]. '100%' is a useful value if you're using proportional-column-width(), but since you know what length you want, you should use that. Regards, Tony Graham Tony.Graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Director W3C XSL FO SG Invited Expert Menteith Consulting Ltd XML, XSL and XSLT consulting, programming and training Registered Office: 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland Registered in Ireland - No. 428599 http://www.menteithconsulting.com -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- xmlroff XSL Formatter http://xmlroff.org xslide Emacs mode http://www.menteith.com/wiki/xslide Unicode: A Primer urn:isbn:0-7645-4625-2 [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#fo_table
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] FO Table widths - table-l, David Carlisle | Thread | [xsl] RE: Counting preceding elemet, Karlmarx Rajangam |
Re: [xsl] FO Table widths - table-l, Tony Graham | Date | Re: [xsl] FO Table widths - table-l, Karl Stubsjoen |
Month |