Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,769

    Question Tableless designs, who's doing it?

    So I keep hearing about designing without tables, and that it's very search engine friendly, because the crawlers can get to everything easier. Who can show me some nice tableless designs/sites?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    FTL on the Information Super Highway
    Posts
    142
    The sites of CSS advocates:

    Jeffrey Zeldman: http://www.zeldman.com/

    Eric Meyer: http://www.meyerweb.com/

    Read their books.
    Serial Beggar
    Hate Your Family? Have No Friends? Make Me Your Beneficiary!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    22
    Seems I can't post urls here (still a newbie) but I absolutely love:

    cssvault.com

    which has a nice selection of sites who choose to go the XHTML/CSS route rather than big nasty tables.

    P.S. Sorry if this gets me banned or something for 'evading' the no-url posting.
    Sneak in to any website! <--- it's for sale!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,146
    With the understanding that there is a time and a place for using TABLES, I have found that TABLELESS pages are great for a very good reason; it forces one to understand and correctly use CSS.

    As CSS is slowly becoming used more 'n more for Web site Design, people are learning how much easier it is, to create nice Web pages. Not only from a visual POV, but also with regard to site maintainence.

    There are some other good threads about TABLELESS Web pages and using CSS as the Search term, or even 'tableless', would help to find a few. Some Major League sites are using TABLELESS design, but I don't remember their URLs.
    PotentProducts.com - for all your Hosting needs
    Helping people Host, Create and Maintain their Web Site
    ServerAdmin Services also available

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,997
    Most of the big league site using tableless designs are still techy sites (which you would expect to). There aren't many of the big league companies using tableless designs yet. Until all of the browsers support CSS2 properly it takes a very long time to learn how to code for all browsers.

    What may work in Mozilla may not work in IE and vice versa and then don't even get me started about IE for a mac! Safari tends to do it's own thing in certain places too.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX - Originally from UK
    Posts
    707
    http://www.csszengarden.com

    Fantastic example of just what can be done by changing the stylesheet only on a site.

    http://www.wired.com

    There's plenty more, but my brain isn't working properly yet today.
    Kinkamono Internet Services - The Internet. Done Right.
    Dive In...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    513
    I agree with Rich2k. As long as older platforms and the older and wide diversity of browsers does't 100% support a layout style, i'll just go for tables.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    New Orleans, LA
    Posts
    261
    yeah, nothing compares to tables, when it comes to cross-platform compatability.
    "Twenty years from now you'll be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did."
    - Mark Twain

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,997
    And remember contrary to popular belief, properly designed table layouts doesn't break WAI level A accessibility guidelines.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    28
    CSS is great, however it limits you to the compatibility of different browsers. Some people feel that it's okay to design strictly for WinXP/IE6, you can do this but the site might not display properly in other browsers and different OSs.

    The other problem with CSS layouts is that you are somewhat limited in how the layout looks. There are only a handfull of pure CSS layouts which work flawlessly in all browsers and OSs and if you don't like any of them you're kinda out of luck.

    Another issue I see alot are people who want to get away from tables because they're so complex, but then they use 50 million nested <div> tags which is just as bad and 50 million nested <table> tags.

    If you decide to do some form of tableless design make sure you're not just doing it for the sake of not using tables, in many cases tables just work better and since in the end we're concerned with the user viewing the page, we should do what's best for them.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,056
    I'm waiting until its more supported. Most of my clients are on older browsers, and old computers. Using the latest and greatest isn't the best idea in my case.

    Tables do get annoying though. I'm building a site that uses TONS of them. But I need them to make the site look the way I want it to look.

    RMF

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    London/Vienna
    Posts
    11
    Some more high-profile examples:
    sprint.com, sprintpcs.com, espn.com, lycos.de, pga.com, quark.com, inc.com

    A portal like Lycos Europe or a mainstream company like Sprint wouldn't be using tableless design if comaptibility issues were as bad as some claim in this thread...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,769
    Originally posted by c3o
    Some more high-profile examples:
    sprint.com, sprintpcs.com, espn.com, lycos.de, pga.com, quark.com, inc.com

    A portal like Lycos Europe or a mainstream company like Sprint wouldn't be using tableless design if comaptibility issues were as bad as some claim in this thread...
    http://www.sprint.com - I admit this does look nice for a tableless design. Clean and simple, and it loaded instantly. How much would one of you tableless designers charge for a basic layout like that? (No graphics or images, just coding a similar layout)

    By the way, I noticed this when looking at their source.....

    <p class="hide"><strong>Note:</strong> This site was designed with Cascading Stylesheets for layout &amp; design. You are seeing this note either because those Stylesheets didn't reach your machine or because you are using an outdated browser. You may only view the raw textual content of this site. In order to view, use, and enjoy this site to the fullest at the maximum security level, please visit our <a href="http://www.sprintpcs.com/upgrade.html">Browser Upgrade</a> page to view a list of browsers that support web standards. </p>

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,997
    Why shouldn't you use tables though... well designed tables don't break accessibility... it it ain't broke don't fix it. Tables work fine in most instances.

    That isn't to say that I haven't used css layouts but for complicated site layouts tables are still by far easier and more compatible.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    28
    I think the idea in the 'tableless' design community is that tables are good for displaying TABULAR data, but not necessarily layouts.

    One of the main benefits of not using tables for layouts is that you're likely to be writing less code, you don't need spacer images and you don't need multiple nested tables.

    I also agree that the fact that many high profile sites are using CSS suggests that CSS is more compatible than some make it out to be, however in most cases there are some things that just can't be done easily accross all platforms.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Mtl, Quebec
    Posts
    97
    Originally posted by maxor
    CSS is great, however it limits you to the compatibility of different browsers. Some people feel that it's okay to design strictly for WinXP/IE6, you can do this but the site might not display properly in other browsers and different OSs.

    The other problem with CSS layouts is that you are somewhat limited in how the layout looks. There are only a handfull of pure CSS layouts which work flawlessly in all browsers and OSs and if you don't like any of them you're kinda out of luck.

    Another issue I see alot are people who want to get away from tables because they're so complex, but then they use 50 million nested <div> tags which is just as bad and 50 million nested <table> tags.

    If you decide to do some form of tableless design make sure you're not just doing it for the sake of not using tables, in many cases tables just work better and since in the end we're concerned with the user viewing the page, we should do what's best for them.


    Heh heh, sorry, but designing with divs takes much less code than with tables. 2nd, CSS gives much more possibilities than HTML. 3rd, CSS is very well supported, but it's true that it doesn't appear the same on all browsers, but it's IE that doesn't interpret it properly.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,769
    Originally posted by FleZ
    CSS is very well supported, but it's true that it doesn't appear the same on all browsers, but it's IE that doesn't interpret it properly.
    But IE is what most people use, so regardless of why it doesn't appear properly, that's a significant setback for CSS, and one that will keep a lot of people from attempting to use it to it's full capabilities. Right?

    Afterall, most people I've seen around use CSS just for text, to keep things uniform regardless of browser text size settings, but are not using it for much of anything else. This is true for me too, I must admit.

    This is a great conversation, and I hope folks will continue to contribute.

  18. #18
    Just because IE has poor CSS support does not prevent me from using its advanced capabilities.

    Many designers are coding their pages so that IE 5.5 and below see only text. The user is informed that their browser is obselete (heck, IE 6 is obsolete), and they are encouraged to download Mozilla, FireFox, Opera, etc...any standards-compliant browser will do. Some designers even do this for IE 6. While you may think this is too extreme, the fact is that Microsoft isn't going to frix IE's layout problems. After nearly three years, it's pretty obvious that they don't really care - MS won't be releasing another major browser update until Longhorn. So it's up to designers to educate users about the display problems associated with using IE (not to mention security flaws, etc.).

    Another option is the hack known as "IE7" which uses DHTML to fix Internet Explorer display issues. The hack works extremely well, and the developer has put a ton of work into it to assure that you won't have to spend forever trying to get your page to look right in IE.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,997
    Many corporate environments, the user doesn't get the chance to download new browsers as that is blocked by firewalls so by your approach you are possibly loosing large chunks of traffic.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    London/Vienna
    Posts
    11
    I've never seen that method (display text only) applied to IE 5 or even 6, and in my opinion that would be far too extreme and ignoring the reality of browser marketshare. It is, however, usually done to Netscape 4/IE 4. Just don't serve them the stylesheet, and they will see an ugly/plain, but perfectly usable site.

    I made a list of CSS/tableless design/semantic markup advantages a while ago:
    • Better machine readability (less code, more meaning in code, more logically organized)
      > search engines, aural browsers for the disabled
    • Possibility of using the same document with different stylesheets
      > easy versions for PDA & smart phones, automatic print version, user-selectable 'skins'
    • One Stylesheet contains all the design of an entire website
      > easier updates and changes, less loading time and traffic
    • Backwards compatibility
      > Even without CSS and in the most arcane browsers, the content is -- although not pretty -- logically structured and easily usable
    • More precise design
      > CSS offers pixel-perfect absolute positioning, advanced text formatting (line heights, character spacing) etc. as well as many new, but as of yet not perfectly supported features like fixed positioning, rounded corners, etc.
    • It's the future
      > Table-based designs are quickly becoming obsolete, CSS design skills will be more and more sought after as the commercial web world catches up with blogs who have been almost exclusively using CSS layouts perfectly well for years


    Another high-profile tableless site: http://news.com

    A great presentation titled "Why tables for layout is stupid"
    http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    28
    Originally posted by FleZ
    Heh heh, sorry, but designing with divs takes much less code than with tables. 2nd, CSS gives much more possibilities than HTML. 3rd, CSS is very well supported, but it's true that it doesn't appear the same on all browsers, but it's IE that doesn't interpret it properly.
    1. The point I was making about nested divs vs. nested tables is that if you're nesting divs upon divs upon divs you're missing the point of css, or at least there is a better way to do what you're trying to do.

    2. I agree CSS is great, I never said it wasn't as powerfull as HTML.

    3. CSS is NOT very well supported. Sure IE is a big problem, but you can't just ignore it. Do you have any idea what the number of people using windows/IE is? A LOT! You can't ignore this huge chunk of potential visitors. If you're telling them to upgrade their browser, they're going to just leave your site. I love CSS as much as the next guy, but I don't live in fantasy land.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,769
    Originally posted by maxor
    Sure IE is a big problem, but you can't just ignore it. Do you have any idea what the number of people using windows/IE is? A LOT! You can't ignore this huge chunk of potential visitors. If you're telling them to upgrade their browser, they're going to just leave your site. I love CSS as much as the next guy, but I don't live in fantasy land.
    I agree, and was just saying something very similar in another thread. I think CSS is great too, but I think that anybody designing in a way that intentionally disregards IE users, is making a big mistake.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX - Originally from UK
    Posts
    707
    <edit> Bah. Contained a massive diatribe. Too early and no coffee. Edited accordingly.</edit>
    Last edited by Zopester; 04-13-2004 at 04:25 AM.
    Kinkamono Internet Services - The Internet. Done Right.
    Dive In...

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    21
    This DIV vs. Tables matter makes interesting debate, but I think people could've already answered their own questions in regards to a resolution. Constantly, designers are adding accessibility features to their websites to make text readable, turn images off etc etc. But with the new XML standards, things can take to a new height. It's now possible to design websites to EVERY POSSIBLE specification. If you're developing a website with XML, and are defining all the text, data and images in XML documents, then why not use the power of Extensible Stylesheets to cure your ailments? Using the stylesheets, and some Javascript, you can detect the browser and res of each user, and redirect them to the necessary stylesheet, whether it be a 1024x768 Firefox browser, or a 800x600 IE 6 one.

    Then again, it's a matter of time, price and accessibility. When you open up new doors, you also give problems the opportunity to walk in on you. It's a matter of sitting down and deciding what's best for your site, and your user.
    *bump* There goes another host.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    In an igloo up north
    Posts
    21
    I prefer to code in "proper" techinques... I still have my old versions of my sites... all clogged with tables... CSS just seems to make it a) easier to code b) easier to read.

    I hope to have a few examples as soon as I see some $.

    d3.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •