> Am 06.01.2016 um 15:22 schrieb a kusa:
>
> Thank you for all your input. It gets tricky without the total width.
>
> Michael, just dumb doubt / clarification. For RestRW, is 'Total',
SumRW+SumAW?

No, Total is meant to be the somehow known absolute total width.

- Michael

> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Michael MC<ller-Hillebrand
> mmh@xxxxxxxxx <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> I was looking to do something similar and found this question. In my
>>> case, I don't have the total table column width always. So, if I have
>>> a mixed col width values of 1.38,1.38.1*,1.38, how can I find the real
>>> value for 1*?
>>
>> As Eliot mentioned, some absolute total value is required. Unless you are
e.g. in an FO environment, where 100% can be seen as the current available
width.
>>
>> In a more general way I did it something like this:
>>
>> * Columns without width or just "*" are treated as "1*"
>> * Calculate the sum of all relative widths (SumRW)
>> * Calculate the sum of all absolute widths (SumAW)
>>
>> * Calculate remaining width RestRW := Total - SumAW
>>  - If it is b	$ 0 we have a problem
>>  - Else each remaining column width is ColRW / SumRW multiplied with the
RestRW
>>
>> - Michael