[whatwg] Table integrity and conformance

[Henri Sivonen]

On Nov 8, 2006, at 02:59, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Oct 23, 2006, at 21:31, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>
>>> I think cells extending (via colspan/rowspan) into columns or  
>>> rows that
>>> contain no cells other than extended cells should be at least a  
>>> SHOULD
>>> NOT, maybe a MUST NOT.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be sufficient and more desirable to require each row  
>> to have at
>> least one cell that starts on that row and each column to have at  
>> least one
>> cell that starts in that column? (By starts I mean having the top  
>> left corner
>> there.)
>>
>> This would allow tables like this:
>> 112
>> 344
>> and
>> 12
>> 13
>> 43
>> (Where numbers denote cells so that 11 means a cell spanning two  
>> columns.)
>
> What's the difference?

Your formulation seemed to require at least one non-extended (i.e.  
colspan="1" rowspan="1") cell on each row and column, unless by  
"extending into" you didn't mean the row/column on which the cell  
starts.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen at iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/