Hello T.J.,

thanks for supporting me.


> -----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: "T.J. Crowder" <t...@crowdersoftware.com>
> Gesendet: So. 18.01.09 (11:59)
> An: "Prototype & script.aculo.us"
> (...)
>  Most browsers will tolerate it if you don't do that
> with
> literal HTML (they insert the TBODY for you when parsing), but
> perhaps
> IE isn't doing that when you go straight to the DOM and build things
> up yourself.  Easy enough to try it and see if that's what's wrong.
You gave me the right tip.
TBody was missing in IE.

> BTW, FWIW, if this is a really big table, you _may_ find that you get
> better performance building up an HTML string and then letting the
> browser interpret the string (you can put a div where you want the
> table to be, then use Element#update on the div and pass in the
> string).  Browsers are really optimized around parsing HTML and
> building up the necessary internal structures, whereas their DOM
> access methods can be markedly slower.  Depends on the browser and
> version.  And again, if the table is small, it doesn't matter.
At the moment I have a little problem with the images width.
It seems that IE have a problem with the img attribute width=80px.
When I fixed this problem I will try your suggestion about the table

At the moment I didn't understand what you mean.
It is possible that you can give me an example?


Gesendet von freenetMail-
Mehr als nur eine

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to