![]() ![]() Either visible/hidden is fine, just not auto // overflow: visible !important overflow: hidden ! important // Fix #3: After applying fix #1, Edge & IE will render all rows correctly, but IE & Firefox have a large gap after tables, due to flexbox bugs? display: block ! important. Fix #2: After applying fix #1, sometimes this class gets overflow, and it is set to overflow:auto, making a scrollbar appear for various browsers. I'd like to hide that behind a flag though, since it will incur a performance hit. We could possibly simulate a single by rendering a second in the main that's only visible for print. Ideally we would also enable this, but methinks that's really only possible when we have a single element. That is standard behavior when using a single. One thing that was interesting when I just built a standard table for my needs is that it seems (in chrome at least) the table headers are repeated on each of the pages that are printed So to sum it up, no there's no row missing. ![]() The last row is indeed cut off, but I believe that's just some minor issue with margins and paddings that is not unfixable. There's no row missing between Brando and Bridgette. I manually disabled the fixed height (as a media query would do) and tweaked some other layout settings, in order for the table body to expand as tall as its content. Also is there something between Brando and Bridget? i.e. ![]() setting the pixel height? I was only asking because that last entry you have in your example is cut off. That media query stuff that you were doing, was it using a "fixed height" i.e. Well you already could make your light tables more printer-friendly by tweaking the CSS a bit. I know there is plenty of work still to do but man am I glad it's not just a simple fix (i.e. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |