Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact forrest-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list forrest-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 52016 invoked from network); 22 May 2002 07:04:11 -0000 Received: from dobit2.rug.ac.be (157.193.42.8) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 22 May 2002 07:04:11 -0000 Received: from allserv.rug.ac.be (allserv.rug.ac.be [157.193.40.42]) by dobit2.rug.ac.be (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g4M748I10154; Wed, 22 May 2002 09:04:08 +0200 (MEST) Received: from elisabeth (otsrv1.iic.rug.ac.be [157.193.121.51]) by allserv.rug.ac.be (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id g4M747W01923; Wed, 22 May 2002 09:04:07 +0200 (MEST) From: "Steven Noels" To: Cc: Subject: RE: double height? Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 09:04:06 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <0205220954250G.00870@igacer> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@indexgeo.com.au] > Steven Noels wrote: > > John Morrison wrote: > > > > > Does anybody else see the light-blue margin just above the > > > title "Mailing List Archive" > > > (http://localhost:8080/xml-forrest/mail-archives.html) > > > to be twice (approx ;) of any of the other's? (eg > > > http://localhost:8080/xml-forrest/mail-lists.html) > > > > It's an issue caused by the use of colspans in our tables. > I had some very > > senior graphic designer look into it, and she advised me to > redo the > > layout using nested tables instead. Work ahead for us ;-) > > However, i recall us having a discussion about the horrors > of nested tables. I cannot remember if that was here or on > cocoon-dev. I trust her judgment without reservation. She said we'd never get cross-browser page fidelity if we use merged cells, and that we really should stick to nested tables. Unfortunately, she has no time to help us out :-( > WIth this issue that John raises, i see another/different cause. > It is because the page has minimal content. To prove this i > simply added a
    with about 20 dummy
  • which filled > up the page. The top light-blue margin is back to normal. That doesn't make sense to me, sorry. Your analysis is correct, but we can't establish a rule stating you should have at least 10 lines of text in each document ;-| Duh. Getting back to nested tables? I did some cross-browser testing on w2K and linux - pages look quite similar on all these platforms. So just fixing this little problem would avoid us going for nested tables. Anyone any ideas?