When generating PDFs from web‑based application data, tables are rendered within a fixed page width and rely on automatic column scaling. When a table contains a large number of columns (such as 8 or more), the available horizontal space is divided across all columns, which can cause headers and values, particularly those with longer content, to become compressed.

While it is technically possible to influence table and column widths through more advanced configuration using custom CSS, this approach is fragile and difficult to maintain. PDF rendering engines often interpret CSS inconsistently, and small changes to data, labels, or page layout can easily break the formatting. As a result, this custom configuration solution is typically not reliable enough for dynamic application data and may introduce ongoing maintenance challenges, making it impractical for many use cases.

Additionally, from a design and usability perspective, long‑form or narrative content (such as comments) is not well‑suited to a tabular layout, especially in PDFs. Tables are best used for structured, concise data (for example, numeric or short text values). Comment fields generally require flexible spacing and wrapping to remain readable, which tables do not handle well under PDF constraints.

For these reasons, we recommend limiting tables to structured data and presenting comment or descriptive fields outside of the table using a stacked or paragraph‑based layout. This approach results in more predictable formatting and improved readability in the generated PDF.

While we understand the concern and the limitations this creates, fine‑grained control of table column widths in PDFs is not something we currently support in a robust, maintainable way.

Let us know if you’d like us to move this suggestion into monitoring interest. While this isn’t something we plan to address in the near term, it’s feedback we’ll continue to be mindful of.