Stylesheets - Re: Tables: periodic, elemental, operatic, HTML4, CSS2 (with tabular

Author

Re: Tables: periodic, elemental, operatic, HTML4, CSS2 (with tabular

Matthias Gutfeldt

2004-02-20, 12:29 pm

Karl Smith wrote:
> I heard a rumour that Opera succeeded where none have before, and
> implemented the tables described in HTML4 and CSS2. So I thought I'd
> try it out with the well known Periodic Table.
>
> http://users.tpg.com.au/karl6740/cs...s_periodic.html
> [Do not view in MSIE, you've been warned.]
>
> CSS:
> Notice in the TRs with the lanthanides and actinides, the empty TDs at
> the end taking the background colour of the TR? I say they shouldn't
> do this. I say: table {empty-cells: hide;} - means that empty area
> should be transparent and show the background texture.

The spec <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/tables.ht...def-empty-cells>
doesn't even mention what should happen to the background, it only deals
with the cell border. So I guess browsers can do as they see fit.

Matthias

Andreas Prilop

2004-02-24, 1:31 pm

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Stan Brown wrote:

> When I took chemistry a liter wasn't exactly 1000 cc either.

But even at that time, "cc" was wrong for cubic centimetre.
<http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/rules.html>
The symbol is cm³ in ISO-8859-1 and cm3 in ASCII (ISO 2955).

> What's the IPUAC recommendation for the series starting at Z=89? Not
> "transuranoids", I assume?

Actinoids
<http://www.iupac.org/publications/c...1/2_holden.html>

Andreas Prilop

2004-02-25, 1:29 pm

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Stan Brown wrote:

>
> I think probably you mean
> http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/checklist.html

I mean what I write. The page I cited has _two_ links, another
to <http://physics.nist.gov/Document/checklist.pdf>

> But I'm curious: that gives today's rule but (unless I misread) does
> not say when it became effective. Was "cc" deprecated even in the
> early 1960s?

I'm afraid this is way OT here and I suggest <news:misc.metric-system>
for such questions.