Mixture of td widths in a table

corblimey

I have a table with 3 columns. I want column 1 to be 100 pixels wide, and the other two to scale to the width of the page. I don't know how wide the table will be, it's set to 100%. If I use the following:

<table...>
    <tr>
        <td width="100"></td>
        <td width="50%"></td>
        <td width="50%"></td>
    </tr>
</table>

then it appears that the first column is set correctly, but the second column takes over 50% of the screen width rather than 50% of what's left.

I have more than 3 columns in my actual table, I have 9, and some I want to be fixed widths while the others scale. Is there any way of doing this, short of table within table?

Adam

I'm pretty sure this is going to have to be css...

EDIT: you can do them all with pixels, or all with percentages but you can't interchange as far as I can see...so doing it with percentages(because I wouldnt recommend using pixels) simply means you have to set the table width to 100% and work out by eye the widths you want the rest to be.

The reason I'm saying I would favour percentages is because they will scale on different peoples monitors and resolutions.

corblimey

The reason I'd like to do this is because I have a fixed-width dropdown in some of the columns. The client has requested that the other columns scale correctly, and keep asking about all the 'space' in the column with the dropdown when I have everything set to percentages and increase the resolution.

Screw 'em

Adam

Pfft, clients :rolleyes:

Mutant_Fruit

<table width"300px"...>
    <tr width = 50%>
        <td width="100"></td>
        <td width="50%"></td>
        <td width="50%"></td>
    </tr>
</table>

Try specifying the width of the TR explicitly (either as a % total of the table or as a pixel width, i chose 50% of the width of the table, which i defined to be 300px).

bonkey

Can't you use a single td with no with specified so it takes all remaining space? And then inside this td define two columns each taking 50% of available space?

Mutant_Fruit

bonkey wrote:

Can't you use a single td with no with specified so it takes all remaining space? And then inside this td define two columns each taking 50% of available space?

It'd mean having to put a table inside that single large TD and defining a row and two new TD's in that table. According to some that's a big no-no

Adam

Mutant_Fruit wrote:

It'd mean having to put a table inside that single large TD and defining a row and two new TD's in that table. According to some that's a big no-no

True, but I was wondering did you test your suggested method? It didn't work for me.

Goodshape

bonkey wrote:

Can't you use a single td with no with specified so it takes all remaining space? And then inside this td define two columns each taking 50% of available space?

That's what I was thinking (don't see another way of doing it with tables), but then I thought that the two inside columns would take up 50% of the screen width regardless.

Maybe not tough, worth trying (don't have an editor open atm, so I'm not going to bother :P).

..although, obviously, you should be using a few DIV's and some CSS for this sort of thing these days.

mewso

Mutant_Fruit wrote:

It'd mean having to put a table inside that single large TD and defining a row and two new TD's in that table. According to some that's a big no-no

Looks like this table is for layout anyway so no-nos are go-go.

brian_rbk

<table width = 100% BORDER=1>
<tr>
<td width ="100">
<td width = "*">
<td width = "*">
</tr>
</table>

this help ?

Seth Brundle

Could a number of divs not be used?
div1 = 100% & contains
div2 = 100px
div3 = * & contains
div4 = 50%
div5 = 50%

corblimey

Yeah, I tried the table within a table method (or kbannon's div within a div alternate) and it didn't look too good, so I'm trying to come up with a layout that works for me and the client. Thanks all.