Subject: Re: [xsl] FO Table widths - table-layout fixed behaviour and use From: "Karl Stubsjoen" <kstubs@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 10:27:31 -0700 |
Just bubbling this back to the top of the list... I'm going to play with this feature a little today, so will be able offer some feedback on this one. [From July 22nd, I wrote] Ok, when I correctly use column-width for table-column, the fixed width layout and total width of table renders as expected: a 5 inch wide table. However, I am with Tony, and assuming that the same result could be achieved as I originally suggested, by specifying table-cell widths in each table-cell of the first row. This does not seem to be supported though. Can anyone confirm this? Also, one more behaviour which I am use to, is the omition of 1 table-cell width of a set of declared table cell widths would result in a table width of 100%, where the omitted table-cell width stretches to accomodate (all other table-cell widths adhere to their designated width value). Is this the expected behaviour of FO? Thanks, Karl.. On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:41 PM, David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > me> wrong > Tony> correction > > Ooops, sorry, thanks for the correction. > > David > > ________________________________________________________________________ > The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England > and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is: > Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom. > > This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is > powered by MessageLabs. > ________________________________________________________________________
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Displaying Unique attribu, Wendell Piez | Thread | Re: [xsl] FO Table widths - table-l, G. Ken Holman |
Re: [xsl] Match Commented elements, Sam Byland | Date | Re: [xsl] FO Table widths - table-l, G. Ken Holman |
Month |