Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.php > #17901
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.php |
| Subject | Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? |
| Date | 2019-04-26 11:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <gig129FbtnjU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <q9rq6d$rf6$1@gioia.aioe.org> <gidbkjFol28U1@mid.individual.net> <gidmatFqspeU1@mid.individual.net> <q9uhsu$hd3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <gig0qcFbs0qU1@mid.individual.net> |
On 26.04.19 11:20, Arno Welzel wrote: > On 26.04.19 11:09, R.Wieser wrote: > >> Arno, >> >>> So the a simplified example for the code fragment *could* >>> be like this: >>> [snip] >> >> Great ! You now have (at least) /two/ tables, which means that alignment >> wise they can, and most likely will, look quite different from each other. >> I guess you didn't think that far ? > > Yes I did. > >> And before you come up with the obvious "fix" for that: I hope you do >> realize that that will disable the tables own with recalculation (based on >> the contents) ? In short, now your "rules" are dictating what the >> webpage looks like - instead of helping with what the webpage designer wants >> to have. > > I am very well aware of it. My example was just to demonstrate, how > *valid* HTML would look like. And of course this may cause layout issues > which have to be fixed as well. > > Feel free to show a better solution using valid HTML code, I'm always > willing to learn from good examples. And no - valid HTML is not > "perfection" it's just the baseline from which a website has to start. And to avoid further meta discussions a bit of my background: <https://github.com/arnowelzel/> <https://wordpress.org/plugins/lightbox-photoswipe/> <https://wordpress.org/plugins/timed-content/> <https://arnowelzel.de/en/projects/websites> -- Arno Welzel https://arnowelzel.de
Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Dan Campbell <dcwhatthe@gmail.com> - 2019-04-24 07:30 -0700
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 08:55 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-25 10:12 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 11:01 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-25 12:08 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 13:59 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-25 16:13 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 16:56 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-04-25 08:05 -0400
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 10:53 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 11:14 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 11:59 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 12:08 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2019-05-29 19:20 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-25 09:49 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 11:06 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-25 14:09 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Dan Campbell <dcwhatthe@gmail.com> - 2019-04-25 05:32 -0700
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 11:20 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 11:31 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 11:09 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 11:20 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 11:24 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-04-26 12:31 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 13:34 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-04-26 13:36 +0200
Re: Is it legitimate to have a continuous TABLE through multiple FORMs? "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2019-04-25 21:36 +0200
csiph-web