Using CSS td width absolute, position

Jake picture Jake · Feb 8, 2013 · Viewed 167.4k times · Source

Please see this JSFIDDLE

td.rhead { width: 300px; }

Why doesn't the CSS width work?

<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<td class="rhead">need 300px</td>
<td colspan="7">Week #0</td>
<td colspan="7">Week #1</td>
<!-- etc..-->
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="rhead"></td>
<td>S</td><td>M</td><td>T</td><td>W</td><td>T</td><td>F</td><td>S</td>
<td>S</td><td>M</td><td>T</td><td>W</td><td>T</td><td>F</td><td>S</td>
<!-- etc... -->
</tr>
<thead>
</table>

Also, what are the effects of position:fixed, absolute etc have on td widths if any? I am looking for a reason more than a fix. I am hoping to understand how it works.

td width is not 300px as desired

Answer

Explosion Pills picture Explosion Pills · Feb 8, 2013

This may not be what you want to hear, but display: table-cell does not respect width and will be collapsed based on the width of the entire table. You can get around this easily just by having a display: block element inside of the table cell itself whose width you specify, e.g

<td><div style="width: 300px;">wide</div></td>

This shouldn't make much of a difference if the <table> itself is position: fixed or absolute because the position of the cells are all static relative to the table.

http://jsfiddle.net/ExplosionPIlls/Mkq8L/4/

EDIT: I can't take credit, but as the comments say you can just use min-width instead of width on the table cell instead.