Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Nested Tables

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Manfred Braun

unread,
Jul 2, 2001, 6:14:12 PM7/2/01
to
No, I am not (from Ireland) - but have heard the beer should be really good
;-)

Hi,

I made a directory viewer, which gives me some specials, not present in
Windows Explorer. I have exactly the same problem and no solution. I am on
the road now, to build that the usual way (with indention for each down
level directory). But the nested table way is eachy, elegant and has the
same structure like the filesystem......Even if I use no borders, I can see
from the structure that they are there. The rightmost TD is walking more and
more to the left as more tables are nested. Finally, the right-most column
is not on the same vertical line :-(

I fighted with an additional problem: I use four TD's for the table, the
right wo, holding size and number of files (of a directory) have fixed
width. The first, for the name too. The second TD is auto and the table is
100% width. So the auto-TD takes space as neccesary. This is not working, if
you nest another table in the first one :-(

Best regards,
Manfred Braun

(Private)
Lange Roetterstrasse 7
D68167 Mannheim
Germany

mailto:_mbr...@manfred.mannheim-netz.de
(Remove the anti-spam-underscore to mail me!)

"Nobody113" <bro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1e2d01c10339$c955b0e0$9ae62ecf@tkmsftngxa02...
> Hello. I need totally ignore borders (border-collapse
> doesnt work for deeply nesting - borders are very thin,
> but not zero - in a case of depply nesting it disfigure
> the table).
> Tanks in advance (and beer if U're from Ireland).
>

Rowland Shaw

unread,
Jul 3, 2001, 3:32:06 AM7/3/01
to
Do you have a snippet or example that illustrates this?

I'm 99% sure it can be done -- have you also set the border-width, margin,
and padding to all be zero?

Another solution would be to rationalise the numbers of tables -- I once saw
an argument stating that nested tables shouldn't ever be needed; I'd prefer
to say that you should need to nest a table in a nested table, but
otherwise, I agree with the sentiment :o)


"Nobody113" <bro...@hotmail.com> wrote...

0 new messages