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 |
I hestitate to enter this note because I think we've found a feature that isn't supposed to be there...and I'm afraid you might take it away! (Grit teeth....) We wanted to produce a table that had column totals enclosed between rules something like that shown below. The first rule had to be produced with <rule>; the ending rule was produced by the doctype, to end the table. GENRAL 59.7 % 48.2 % 45.9 % -2.3% CXCAD 61.7 % 54.7 % 55.7 % +1.0% PHOBIA 68.8 % 59.2 % 46.5 % -12.7% COOKIE 66.0 % 61.9 % 51.9 % -10.0% SSDEVO 70.3 % 60.3 % 63.7 % +3.4% __________________________________________________________ CX-ALL 65.1 % 56.6 % 52.7 % -3.9% __________________________________________________________ Trying to use <rule> in the context of <table_row> produced a broken rule, even when used with <span>. (We tried it 3 or 4 different ways.) So we used <rule> by itself. DOCUMENT gave an error, warning us that <rule> was out of context...but it gave us exactly what we wanted nonetheless. The source code is shown below. <TABLE> <TABLE_ATTRIBUTES>(WIDE) <TABLE_SETUP>(5\11\11\11\11) <TABLE_ROW>(GENRAL \ 59.7 % \ 48.2 % \ 45.9 % \ - 2.3 %) <TABLE_ROW>(CXCAD \ 61.7 % \ 54.7 % \ 55.7 % \ + 1.0 %) <TABLE_ROW>(PHOBIA \ 68.8 % \ 59.2 % \ 46.5 % \- 12.7 %) <TABLE_ROW>(COOKIE \ 66.0 % \ 61.9 % \ 51.9 % \- 10.0 %) <TABLE_ROW>(SSDEVO \ 70.3 % \ 60.3 % \ 63.7 % \ + 3.4 %) <RULE> <TABLE_ROW>(CX--ALL \ 65.1 % \ 56.6 % \ 52.7 % \ - 3.9 %) <ENDTABLE> The file was processed under BL7. Frankly, we like what happened when we misused <rule>, including the uncluttered code. Any chance you will relax the <table_row> context and officially allow <rule> within the broader context of <table>? We bring it up now, cuz we didn't want to wrongly assume it's there for BL8 and V1.0. If you will not allow it, please advise on how to get a solid rule within <table_row>. Thanx, Rose
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
488.1 | CUPOLA::HAKKARAINEN | with hasty reverence | Wed Jun 10 1987 09:52 | 11 | |
<rule> used to be allowed between rows in bl6. Some of our writers found, to their dismay, that that ``out of context'' message after they'd run the converter. The cases I've seen generally came a writer's wish to have a rule between all rows. I think that such a case would be better handled in an attributes or setup section. This comes back to the need to have a rule of either an arbitrary or a user-specified length throughout the document. While a rule isn't alphanumeric, it is a text element, as much as stuff in math mode. A <rule> tag with an optional width argument might be a solution to these problems. | |||||
488.2 | This works for me! | VAXWRK::SEVERANCE | Wed Jun 10 1987 11:06 | 13 | |
Correct me if I'm wrong but... <TABLE_ROW>(<SPAN>(number of columns)<RULE>) will put a rule in a given table. The only difference is that it puts some extra /vskip before the rule is output. I don't like that extra /vskip and prefer the action of <RULE> not inside <TABLE_ROW>. But I dont like the messages is gives when I do that. Just adding my 2 cents! chris | |||||
488.3 | wishlist | CLOSET::ANKLAM | Wed Jun 10 1987 14:01 | 5 | |
The current behavior (.0) is what it is for V1.0. Arbitrary rules of arbitrary lengths is on the wishlist for a future version. patti | |||||
488.4 | Give me an inch... | 38863::CARRASCO | Thu Jun 11 1987 13:43 | 4 | |
Could we also have "arbitrary" (I assume you mean, user-settable) widths? Measured in points? Pilar. | |||||
488.5 | how about a pica? | CLOSET::ANKLAM | Thu Jun 11 1987 15:16 | 4 | |
when we turn it loose, it will be both for height and width. -pa |