Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

Register Log in
  • Congratulations derfloh on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Table Border 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
ca8msm

ca8msm

Programmer
May 9, 2002
11,327
GB
I'm sure there's a very simple explanation for this, but why doesn't Internet Explorer apply the attributes defined in .standardTable1 td (FireFox shows the border correctly)?

HTML File:
Code: 
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
	"[URL unfurl="true"]http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">[/URL]


<html xmlns="[URL unfurl="true"]http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"[/URL] xml:lang="en" >
<head>

	<title>Page Title</title>

	<!-- Main Stylesheet -->	
	<style type="text/css" title="currentStyle" media="screen">
		@import "css/qt_main.css";
	</style>

</head>


<body id="query_tool_main">

  <form id="frmSections" action="types.php" method="post">

    <div id="container">

      <div id="Step1" class="groupBox1">
        <fieldset>
          <legend>Step 3 - Select Sections</legend>

  	<table class="standardTable1">
		<tr class="boldText">
			<td></td>
			<td>Road Ref</td>
			<td>Start X</td>
			<td>Start Y</td>
			<td>End X</td>
			<td>End Y</td>
			<td>Description</td>
			<td>Length</td>
			<td>Speed Limit</td>
		</tr>
		<tr>		
			<td><input type="Checkbox" name="RoadSection" value="AL1248"></td>
			<td>AL1248</td>
			<td>336640</td>
			<td>371796</td>
			<td>334184</td>
			<td>371597</td>
			<td>A540 to A550</td>
			<td>2.47</td><td>112</td>
		</tr>
	</table>
        </fieldset>
      </div>

    </div>
    
  </form>
</body>
</html>

CSS File:
Code: 
body
{
	background: #C0C0C0 url("../images/white_bg.gif");	
	background-repeat: repeat-y;
	background-position: center;	
}
	
#container
{
	width: 760px;
	margin: 0 auto;
	background-color: #FFFFFF; 
	height:100%;
}

#header
{
	text-align: center;	
}	

.groupBox1
{
	width: 90%;
	margin: 0 auto;
	margin-bottom: 20px;
}	

.left-element 
{
	float: left;
	margin-left: 37px;
}

.right-element 
{
    float: right;
    margin-right: 37px;
}

.vertical-element
{
	vertical-align: top;	
	padding: 5px;
}

.standardTable1
{
	width: 100%;
	border-collapse: collapse;
	text-align: center;
	font-size: small;
}	

.standardTable1 td
{
	border: 1px solid grey;	
}

.boldText
{
	font-weight:bold;
}

Thanks,
Mark


____________________________________________________________

Need help finding an answer?

Try the Search Facility or read FAQ222-2244 on how to get better results.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I still don't understand. Nobody is saying that one should use ALL 16 million colours to paint a border of a table, however, if you need just a specific colour which is outside the 216 palette, you are restricted. And if the prevailing colour from the graphics on the page is one that is outside 216, I feel foolish to have to have to use a colour approximation just to suit screens that virtually no longer exist.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
OK, I give in!
I really think you have missed my point - I'm not advocating the non-use of colours from a 16M pallete, I'm just saying, why over-complicate matters regarding colour when 'most' colours can be achieved using simple HEX colour codes.
I wish I had never entered this debate now!

As I have already mentioned, web designers will use whatever colours they wish from the 16M palette, but the original issues stems from the simple spelling of the word grey. My argument regarding the use of words for colours is that you are really restricted in what colours you can use. So in effect, I was advocating the use of HEX codes, which means you have greater variation in the colours you use, thus you have the use of 16M colours!

But I will not be contributing to this debate any further ... ultimately, there are people who want everything, and more.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'd say that adding the extra constraint of saying that the red/green/blue values may only be 0, 51, 102, 153, 204 or 255 is more complicated than saying you can have any value you like from 0 to 255.

The additional choice does not make things more complicated, but it can make them more difficult. Back in web-safe days, if you wanted, say. a pale yellow background, it had to be #FFFFCC. Now you've got thousands of possibilities to choose from. In such cases, I tend to fall back on the web-safe choice if it looks OK, through force of habit if nothing else. If I need a colour that the web-safe pallette doen't provide, I use it without a second thought.

I do tend to limit myself to the "lazy typist's pallette" though. In CSS, where the RGB values are the same digit repeated, you can specify them with a single-digit instead, e.g. #FFC == #FFFFCC. So you can save a little wear-and-tear on your fingers by restricting yourself to these 4096 colours.

It might be interesting to start a thread (perhaps in the designers' forum) on how to go about choosing colours for your site.

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chris

Exactly my point! I'm glad someone was able to put it more eloquently that I!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

PeDa
  • Locked
  • Question
Display table td's as block element on mobile phone 1
Replies
3
Views
931
spamjim
spamjim
lupidol
  • Locked
  • Question
Table's title row's rounded corners border 1
Replies
2
Views
176
lupidol
lupidol
ashokkumary
  • Locked
  • Question
missing leading zero when we download in excel from html table data.
Replies
1
Views
170
spamjim
spamjim
PeDa
  • Locked
  • Question
Table not formatted correctly in all browsers 1
Replies
2
Views
174
PeDa
PeDa
PSchubert
  • Locked
  • Question
Data in db table cell not displayed in asp table cell -- a CSS issue?
Replies
2
Views
145
vacunita
vacunita

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top