Title: | DOCUMENT T1.0 |
Notice: | **New notesfile (DOCUMENT.NOTE) now available (see note 897)** |
Moderator: | CLOSET::ADLER |
Created: | Mon Feb 09 1987 |
Last Modified: | Thu Oct 31 1991 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 897 |
Total number of notes: | 4397 |
<SPAN> does not appear to be working correctly in the context of the <TABLE_HEADS> tag. I have enclosed 2 table definitions. One produces the output expected, the other does not (actually the first one is the one with the problem). The only difference in the 2 tables is the placement of the carriage return with respect to the <SCAN> tag. I have tried this with GENERAL and OVERHEADS for output on LN03, TERM, MAIL, all with the same results. Thanks, Kathy =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= <table>(This table fails) <table_setup>(7\10\5\5\5\5\5) <table_heads>(Mode of Requested\ <span>(5)Mode of Currently Granted Locks<rule>) <table_heads>(Lock\NL\CR\CW\PR\PW\EX) <table_row>(NL\Yes\Yes\Yes\Yes\Yes\Yes) <endtable> <table>(This table works) <table_setup>(7\10\5\5\5\5\5) <table_heads>(Mode of Requested\<span>(5)Mode of Currently Granted Locks<rule>) <table_heads>(Lock\NL\CR\CW\PR\PW\EX) <table_row>(NL\Yes\Yes\Yes\Yes\Yes\Yes) <endtable> _______________________________________________________ Table_1:_This_table_fails______________________________ *-5 Mode of Cur- rently Mode of Granted Requested Locks Lock________NL_____CR_____CW_____PR_____PW_____EX______ NL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ Table_2:_This_table_works______________________________ Mode of Requested _Mode_of_Currently_Granted_Locks_ Lock________NL_____CR_____CW_____PR_____PW_____EX______ NL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes _______________________________________________________
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
267.1 | <SPAN> is feeling ignored | COOKIE::JOHNSTON | Fri Apr 24 1987 13:01 | 11 | |
I'm curious about whether 267 is a known bug or expected behavior or something else; especially since I told Kathy "Hey! Enter a note into DOCUMENT_FT!" Did this get lost in the melee? If you're looking at it, all we need is a reply to that effect; then we can, again, start sleeping at night! Thanx Rose | |||||
267.2 | will check | CLOSET::ANKLAM | Fri Apr 24 1987 13:32 | 4 | |
it is on my list to look at; it hasn't fallen through the cracks. patti | |||||
267.3 | non-violent principles here | VAXUUM::KOHLBRENNER | Fri Apr 24 1987 15:43 | 6 | |
what's this "melee?" Melee: a hand-to-hand fight among several people, a confused struggle. ;-) | |||||
267.4 | Gee, I always wondered what it meant | COOKIE::JOHNSTON | Fri Apr 24 1987 16:19 | 8 | |
You are a truly unique group if you don't feel like you are in a confused struggle just before a new release. Patent the method for keeping it to even a semi-confused struggle, and you could make mucho $$$. |-) Rose |