In a dim and distant universe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Richard Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> enlightened us thusly: > However there is a general problem with NetSurf's handling of tables > containing unclosed elements. Just try to view the SWI list on the OS3 > PRM CD. It will stagger table cells to the right instead of placing them > in a column as intended. Also mixing up percentage widths and absolute > widths is a nightmare to sort out unless you're very careful.
I'm not sure if there's an official (W3C?) recommendation, but I'd have said that absolute widths should precedence over relative widths. My logic for this is that if you want something say roughly a 1/3rd of the page you could use a table/column width of say "30%", which is more of a 'I want it to look narrower than the rest', whereas if you specifically want a navigation bar or something to be a precise size you'd use something like <td width=200> or something. Thus, exact sizes are generally chosen because that's exactly what you want, whereas percentage/relative sizes are chosen because you're not /that/ fussed but you want it roughly that size relative to the browser window or rest of the page etc.
