John Kaufmann wrote:
In a message dated 2008.05.14 06:24 -0500, Brian Barker wrote:
[Case:A]
If you want the row height to adjust to its contents (and be no larger),
[Action:A]
select "Fit to size" and
leave the height in the box at something suitably small.
[Case:B]
If you want the row height to adjust to its contents but to have a
particular minimum size,
[Action:B]
select "Fit to size" and
set the minimum height in the box.
Sorry to be dense, but I read, and re-read, and still wondered How are
these different? Doesn't the condition "If you want the row height to
adjust to its contents" *imply* "and be no larger"? In both of your
cases, doesn't "Fit to size" mean:
(a) the row size will be at least ("particular minimum size") whatever
is specified with "Fit to size", and
(b) it will grow as needed (but "no larger") to accommodate the row's
contents?
- or have I missed something?
In Case A, each row is its minimum containing size. In Case B, some rows
might be forced larger than the minimum containing size, for instance
so that all rows are at least 2 cm even if some could be fit into 1 cm.
In both cases, if the data requires more than the size specified the row
will grow to the minimum containing size. So what you were missing is
that the data could require less than the specified size.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
