Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 84
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,028

    I miss my tables :(

    I'll keep it short and sweet. CSS is overrated.

    If your viewer is rocking the latest and greatest browser then wonderful. However, toss in some Safari, older versions of IE and FF and you have yourself a nice little mess. Alignments change, page rendering is ugly and slow, etc.

    Explain to me why we don't use tables? And don't give me this "they're for data". IT'S CODING... IT WORKED... AND IT WORKED WELL

    Anyways, just my rant I think we're 100% going back to table design on our pricing and order pages. Not willing to take the chance that those aren't rendering correctly.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Mekhu View Post
    I'll keep it short and sweet. CSS is overrated.

    If your viewer is rocking the latest and greatest browser then wonderful. However, toss in some Safari, older versions of IE and FF and you have yourself a nice little mess. Alignments change, page rendering is ugly and slow, etc.

    Explain to me why we don't use tables? And don't give me this "they're for data". IT'S CODING... IT WORKED... AND IT WORKED WELL

    Anyways, just my rant I think we're 100% going back to table design on our pricing and order pages. Not willing to take the chance that those aren't rendering correctly.
    When you talk about pricing and order pages, it sounds like you're talking about content that should be displayed in a table. Am I missing something?
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,028
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    When you talk about pricing and order pages, it sounds like you're talking about content that should be displayed in a table. Am I missing something?
    Really!? I'll admit I'm not up on the latest CSS standards, practices, etc. All I know is my old coding style (100% tables) would make some of you pass out

    So pricing and order pages *should* be made using tables?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Mekhu View Post
    Really!? I'll admit I'm not up on the latest CSS standards, practices, etc. All I know is my old coding style (100% tables) would make some of you pass out

    So pricing and order pages *should* be made using tables?
    The content area within these pages? Absolutely! That's the whole purpose of tables, to show the relationship between pieces of data. If you have three plans, you put them side-by-side in a table, with proper headings for each column and row. That's precisely what tables are for, and if anyone's ever tried convince you this should be done using other elements (divs, unordered lists, etc.), they are w-r-o-n-g-o!

    Now, the outlying structure of the site is where tables are not meant to be, but if you're only talking about particular pages of your site, then I must assume you're talking about the main content area, not these pages in their entirety, right?
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Gary, IN
    Posts
    209
    I disagree. Tables are messy, and eventually those old browsers wont matter. Even if you're that picky about it, you could make alternate CSS files for the different browsers with trouble. My layout is coded without tables and it looks fine in all browsers.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,028
    Quote Originally Posted by NolanCrutix View Post
    I disagree. Tables are messy, and eventually those old browsers wont matter. Even if you're that picky about it, you could make alternate CSS files for the different browsers with trouble. My layout is coded without tables and it looks fine in all browsers.
    I'm glad to hear it's possible. However, even the general loading of CSS generated pages is ugly in many browsers. Almost as if a page transition is present. However, the pages do load quicker and the code is MUCH easier and less bulky. I was amazed when I first opened our new coded pages.

    Let me use our order page as an example.

    Is it "okay" to have a 3 column, 25 row table consisting of just the order form? All surrounding objects will remain CSS based.

    Column 1: Field Name
    Column 2: Form Object
    Column 3: Required or Optional

    - Some rows will have a   so they act as spacers
    - Some rows will contain notes or explanations.

    So that can all go within my table without breaking any "rules"?

    Thanks guys.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    291
    You're using tables in the right context (even though a lot of people show their tabular data in divs). It's used for tabular data, the type you would see in MS Excel etc.

    If you for example wanted an area saying "Hello! Welcome to our website, blah blah blah" then you'd need to start using some divs as this isn't tabular data. Forms aren't particularly tabular data either, I'd recommend some XHTML supported with CSS styling for your forms

    CSS is great for having less code in your html pages, it leads to faster loading times, remains accessible to mobile/palm devices and of course stops faults with text2voice services for the disabled users.
    DesignBear.com
    View Portfolio

    A trusted WHT member for over 7 years!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Mekhu View Post
    Is it "okay" to have a 3 column, 25 row table consisting of just the order form? All surrounding objects will remain CSS based.

    Column 1: Field Name
    Column 2: Form Object
    Column 3: Required or Optional

    - Some rows will have a   so they act as spacers
    - Some rows will contain notes or explanations.

    So that can all go within my table without breaking any "rules"?
    I'll take this a step further. If you don't do it this way, then you are breaking the "rules." The "rules" clearly state that this is the purpose of tables. To not use tables would be wrong.
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Mekhu View Post
    I'm glad to hear it's possible. However, even the general loading of CSS generated pages is ugly in many browsers.
    If a page which use CSS is "ugly", then the developer isn't a good one. He either needs to learn proper CSS, or be replaced

    Also, it is not at all hard to design websites that cope with even the legacy browser idiosyncrasies - it just needs a careful approach.

    http://www.csszengarden.com/

    Tables should be used for tabular data that's it.
    .
    » Kayako customer service software and live chat software- your customers deserve better than helpdesk

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    938
    I've been quiet for years about this debate on many sites, but thought I would throw my 2 cents in for a change and get it off of my chest.

    I never needed a "hack" for a table. Everything always lines up where you want it. CSS is great for what it was meant for - Style.

    - Tables work in ALL BROWSER ALL OF THE TIME.
    - CSS works in MOST browsers MOST of the time after you beat the hell out of it, yourself and your keyboard.


    For once I would like to hear a CSS die-hard admit you need to jump through more hoops sometimes to get a page to look right IN ALL BROWSERS than you would if you used tables.

    Tables work. Plain and simple. Adding CSS to table layouts works better.

    Oh, did I say TABLES WORK?
    ☆☆☆ Cool Domain Names - DomainSale.link☆☆☆

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    323
    I am middle of the road. No axe to grind.

    Tables are fine. Tables on tables on tables all used with spacer gifs for layout purposes suck big time. Ever try to edit one of those messes? CSS is far cleaner for layout.

    Then use a table for data. That is what they are for.

    Easy. Enjoy life because the end sucks.
    Colbyt

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    For once I would like to hear a CSS die-hard admit you need to jump through more hoops sometimes to get a page to look right IN ALL BROWSERS than you would if you used tables.
    If this was true, then you'd hear it. But semantically valid design (in which tables are used for their proper purpose and other elements are used properly as well) done properly requires little in the way of "hoops" and significantly impacts the amount of markup needed to display a page.

    We have a client who needs to have two columns in a site design swapped so one column is higher in the site's markup than the other without affecting its placement on-screen (for SEO purposes). With tables, this is utterly impossible, because tables read/display data left to right, always (because they're designed to contain data). With tables removed from the site's structure, this change takes 10 seconds.

    Tables work...until they don't.

    Regardless, this is all off-topic, because OP is talking about content layout, not full site layout, and for his described purposes, tables are what he needs.
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Marylebone, London, UK
    Posts
    530
    http://www.school-for-champions.com/...able_trick.htm

    just one of many simple 'table' examples where the
    right-hand table 'column' comes first in the page source.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    Quote Originally Posted by squirrelhost View Post
    http://www.school-for-champions.com/...able_trick.htm

    just one of many simple 'table' examples where the
    right-hand table 'column' comes first in the page source.
    I would like to see others - I should have qualified my statement by including "without the possibility of breaking the layout"

    Still, it continues to illustrate the point that you're, in fact, jumping through more hoops trying to force tables to work for you than using what amounts to some fairly simply CSS techniques that allow for proper placement of objects with minimal code, and therefore minimal effort.

    The only real effort involved is learning it in the first place, and if you'd invested effort into learning how to use tables inappropriately, why not invest the time into learning how to correct this?
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,028
    Thanks so much for such a great discussion. A little rant and I've learned quite a bit! Only at WHT

    I'm going to work on updating the pricing and order page tomorrow. This will really put my mind at rest since we have a very high number of safari, old ff and old IE users. The current CSS just doesn't please me enough across those. (pricing and order, not design).

    Thanks again everyone.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    596
    Mekhu

    I've been designing with tables since 1999.

    I'm gonna tell you one thing...

    Do not, I repeat, do not start designing with CSS a semi-complex Web Site without knowing COMPLETELY how CSS works.
    All its concepts, elements, rules, behaviors etc.

    You have to STUDY at least a minimum of like 2 or 3 GOOD books about CSS, it'll take like 7-8 days. Do not practice the examples, just look at them, don't do nothing, just read and comprehend.
    Sometimes you'll need to read again some chapters.

    While you're at it, everything will start to fall in its place, you'll have ideas for how to achieve certain stuff.

    I know there are tutorials, a lot of them, were you can create columns layouts and etc., but noup, it is necesarry to know everything from the begining, piece by piece.

    I know also that it looks kind of easy to just put DIVs and borders, colors, backgrounds etc. and it motivates to start using them here and there, but doing this for a website with some elements without knowing the whole deal it just take you nowhere but to frustration and hating CSS.

    I had A LOT of struggle to get the hang of tables for creating cool websites. Once I dominate it everything got easy.

    But CSS is horribly more complex to learn.
    Negative margins, Relative and absolut stuff, floats, display etc. But I do trust that it will help a lot once one can code with easy.

    CSS is, actually, designing with numbers and letters, ugly stuff but that's how it is.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    164
    I always use tables. Best way to keep things organized. I also use other block elements placed inside the tables as well.

    I still don't get why some people want sites with "no tables". Kind of silly and pointless to me.

    I had to work on some guys site where the people he paid to do his theme just floated a ton of divs all over the place and used strange padding which overlapped other div's and whatnot. Was so unnecessary. It actually has worse results, and takes longer, and is more complicated.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, United Kingdom
    Posts
    511
    It's perfectly acceptable to use tables for 'tabular data'.
    Sam Asante ~ Web & User Interface Designer ~ SamAsante.com
    World-Class cPanel Themes
    Responsive WHMCS Themes


  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,334
    Quote Originally Posted by N1CK3RS0N View Post
    I still don't get why some people want sites with "no tables". Kind of silly and pointless to me.
    Because it is:

    1. Hard to maintain in the future
    2. Hard to read the code
    3. Isn't easily changed
    4. Is not accessible (i.e. does not gracefully degrade on mobile devices, blind people's screen readers etc)
    5. It is not easily accessible to parsers (like search engines)
    6. It is not future proof


    I had to work on some guys site where the people he paid to do his theme just floated a ton of divs all over the place and used strange padding which overlapped other div's and whatnot.
    Then it was engineered badly - if HTML and CSS is not easy to understand and easy to (re)engineer, then it is a bad case of engineering. As is using tables to control the layout and positioning of everything on a regular website.
    .
    » Kayako customer service software and live chat software- your customers deserve better than helpdesk

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie Edwards View Post
    Then it was engineered badly - if HTML and CSS is not easy to understand and easy to (re)engineer, then it is a bad case of engineering. As is using tables to control the layout and positioning of everything on a regular website.
    Exactly - bad code is bad code, whether you use tables or not.

    But when you use HTML elements properly, and you apply the logic necessary to do so in an efficient manner, there's simply no comparison between semantically valid (i.e. "tableless") site structure, versus table-based (discounting tabular data, of course). If you're still coding with tables, or worse, if you're just learning design and you're learning to use tables, you're going to find your skill set becoming obsolete very quickly. Present this markup to any serious design firm or respectable client, and you'll be shown the door.

    You can push a nail into the wall using the flat part of a wrench, but if you try to tell a client or prospective employer that this is the proper way to drive a nail, you're going to be shown the door too. HTML is a tool - use it properly!
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie Edwards View Post
    Because it is:

    1. Hard to maintain in the future
    2. Hard to read the code
    3. Isn't easily changed
    4. Is not accessible (i.e. does not gracefully degrade on mobile devices, blind people's screen readers etc)
    5. It is not easily accessible to parsers (like search engines)
    6. It is not future proof


    Then it was engineered badly - if HTML and CSS is not easy to understand and easy to (re)engineer, then it is a bad case of engineering. As is using tables to control the layout and positioning of everything on a regular website.
    1. Hard to maintain? For amateurs maybe. I can organized anything using tables in seconds. People need to learn how to use colspan and rowspan. With that in mind, the possibilities are endless.

    2. Again, hard to read? Maybe for amateurs. I tab and organize my coding very well. Its easy to read things and know where they are placed.

    3. Makes no sense. Can be just as easily changed as div's. Quite possibly easier. Considering you don't have to fool around with floating and positioning.

    4. Its every bit as accessible as div's... They are both block elements. The difference is div's display block, while tables td's display table-cell. Table cells align according to how the HTML says, as apposed to Div's breaking after each </div> unless you over ride with CSS. And even then you have to do positioning.

    5. I wouldn't know about SEO, that really isn't my thing. But I would assume its every bit as capable as div's. Saying as Search Engines mainly run based off meta tags and the content itself, not the way the content is coded.

    6. Nothing is future proof.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    Exactly - bad code is bad code, whether you use tables or not.

    But when you use HTML elements properly, and you apply the logic necessary to do so in an efficient manner, there's simply no comparison between semantically valid (i.e. "tableless") site structure, versus table-based (discounting tabular data, of course). If you're still coding with tables, or worse, if you're just learning design and you're learning to use tables, you're going to find your skill set becoming obsolete very quickly. Present this markup to any serious design firm or respectable client, and you'll be shown the door.

    You can push a nail into the wall using the flat part of a wrench, but if you try to tell a client or prospective employer that this is the proper way to drive a nail, you're going to be shown the door too. HTML is a tool - use it properly!
    Give me an example as to where the use of a table wouldn't be optimal as compared to a div.

    HTML is NOT a tool. It is an art. Everyone has their own style and own way of going about doing things. Whether or not you agree with the methods or styles another person uses, that is an opinion, not a fact.

    To the trained person, tables are easier to organize, easier to maintain and just function better than floating and positioning div's. Not to mention the coding isn't as organized as some times you will have a div placed above another in the code, yet it displays after it.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    Quote Originally Posted by N1CK3RS0N View Post
    Give me an example as to where the use of a table wouldn't be optimal as compared to a div.

    HTML is NOT a tool. It is an art. Everyone has their own style and own way of going about doing things. Whether or not you agree with the methods or styles another person uses, that is an opinion, not a fact.

    To the trained person, tables are easier to organize, easier to maintain and just function better than floating and positioning div's. Not to mention the coding isn't as organized as some times you will have a div placed above another in the code, yet it displays after it.
    I gave an example earlier in the thread - switching the order of columns in your markup without shifting their position on the page, without introducing any element breakage into a complex layout.

    Sorry, HTML is not an art - it is a science, a standardized coding platform that is written by coders and interpreted by another standardized technology - browsers. From a visual perspective, the art is in the design. There certainly is artistry involved in finding ways to code more efficiently, but if you're practicing this sort of art, it's already assumed you've dropped tables in favor of leaner, more efficient markup. In basic terms, if you want to create a simple container using a table, you have to declare a minimum of three open/close tags, and only then do you get to put other objects in that space. Want to layer styles? Nest more tables. It's so grossly inefficient, the artist side of me cringes at the thought of pushing all that unnecessary code into place.

    Luckily, in traditional browsing environments, using tables versus more efficient markup has little affect on most people's browsing experience. When you go beyond the traditional computer/browser, that's when things get a little testy, but regardless, why create the extra markup? I posted the results of a proof-of-concept on Digital point a few years back, where we figured out we could save a particular corporation $1.2 million per year by just recoding their intranet (here's a link to the post. The design was fairly complex, and the design company that did it (back in 2002, to be fair), used tables. To do what they needed to do, the complexity of the tables used was necessary. Doing it without made a tremendous impact on time and costs.

    Then there was a site maintained by another developer who frequents WHT that was struggling to take itself to the next level in search engines. We asked the site owner to authorize a complete site overhaul - removing the table-based layout in favor of semantically valid markup, while maintaining the exact same site look. The difference in SEO rankings was significant, as much as a full page maintained increase in rankings for each search term of importance. This is a story I've seen play out and had the pleasure of being involved in many, many times. I can't really go into much more detail, since there are rules about self-promotion, but most people who have been involved in search engine marketing and optimization understand the benefits of using proper markup for layout, having had similar experiences.

    If you want to participate in a fun exercise, go to Monster.com (or the job site of your choice), find openings for experienced designers, and count the number that will not accept applications unless you are able to use semantically valid markup. I'll do this from time to time, and it's usually somewhere between 40-60%. The rest simply don't make mention one way or another. However there isn't a single job opening I've seen in the past five years looking for an expert in tables.

    If you took the time to really learn semantic markup, if you committed yourself to becoming an expert in it, you'd do what everyone who makes that commitment does - you'd wonder how you ever thought it was acceptable to use tables for layouts. I've ventured quite far down both paths, and having spoken as an advocate for the use of tables myself years ago, I've experienced the transition first-hand. Once you "get it," there's no going back
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    I gave an example earlier in the thread - switching the order of columns in your markup without shifting their position on the page, without introducing any element breakage into a complex layout.
    Yes... and 1 single highlight/copy/paste will not shift the column?

    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    Sorry, HTML is not an art - it is a science, a standardized coding platform that is written by coders and interpreted by another standardized technology - browsers. From a visual perspective, the art is in the design. There certainly is artistry involved in finding ways to code more efficiently, but if you're practicing this sort of art, it's already assumed you've dropped tables in favor of leaner, more efficient markup. In basic terms, if you want to create a simple container using a table, you have to declare a minimum of three open/close tags, and only then do you get to put other objects in that space. Want to layer styles? Nest more tables. It's so grossly inefficient, the artist side of me cringes at the thought of pushing all that unnecessary code into place.
    Interesting... first HTML is a "tool" now its a "science"? ^^ Get your story straight then come back and let us know.

    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    Luckily, in traditional browsing environments, using tables versus more efficient markup has little affect on most people's browsing experience. When you go beyond the traditional computer/browser, that's when things get a little testy, but regardless, why create the extra markup? I posted the results of a proof-of-concept on Digital point a few years back, where we figured out we could save a particular corporation $1.2 million per year by just recoding their intranet (here's a link to the post. The design was fairly complex, and the design company that did it (back in 2002, to be fair), used tables. To do what they needed to do, the complexity of the tables used was necessary. Doing it without made a tremendous impact on time and costs.
    What you don't seem to get is if you know HOW to use tables properly, its less time consuming the aligning and positioning div's. Div's are not a more "efficient" markup. They have their own use. There's actually less markup needed than positioning div's.

    The post you provided seems to be a lot of "theory" but doesn't necessarily mean any of it is true. Not to mention as I already stated, if you know how to use tables properly it is less complicated than positioning and aligning div's with extra CSS elements for each div.

    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    Then there was a site maintained by another developer who frequents WHT that was struggling to take itself to the next level in search engines. We asked the site owner to authorize a complete site overhaul - removing the table-based layout in favor of semantically valid markup, while maintaining the exact same site look. The difference in SEO rankings was significant, as much as a full page maintained increase in rankings for each search term of importance. This is a story I've seen play out and had the pleasure of being involved in many, many times. I can't really go into much more detail, since there are rules about self-promotion, but most people who have been involved in search engine marketing and optimization understand the benefits of using proper markup for layout, having had similar experiences.
    So tables are "improper" markup now? Let me know when they remove tables from HTML coding. Then I'll believe you. As for now, there's no reason why using div's in every situation rather than tables would have any impact on search engine results. Tables and div's each have their own specific use.

    If anything I'd consider floating and positioning div's less "proper" than using a simple table to organize the structure of a design.

    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    If you want to participate in a fun exercise, go to Monster.com (or the job site of your choice), find openings for experienced designers, and count the number that will not accept applications unless you are able to use semantically valid markup. I'll do this from time to time, and it's usually somewhere between 40-60%. The rest simply don't make mention one way or another. However there isn't a single job opening I've seen in the past five years looking for an expert in tables.
    http://weblogs.asp.net/alessandro/ar...-co-exist.aspx

    Read it.

    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    If you took the time to really learn semantic markup, if you committed yourself to becoming an expert in it, you'd do what everyone who makes that commitment does - you'd wonder how you ever thought it was acceptable to use tables for layouts. I've ventured quite far down both paths, and having spoken as an advocate for the use of tables myself years ago, I've experienced the transition first-hand. Once you "get it," there's no going back
    Nay, I understand the whole concept of so called "semantic markup", and I don't fully agree.

    Basically what semantics mean is using a particular element of HTML for what it is intended to be used as. I kind of find it ironic when floating and positioning div's with CSS is considered "how they were intended to be used" when you have to over write any default CSS value that they have. Everything has its own use.

    By the way, when you say "if you committed yourself to becoming an expert in it, you'd do what everyone who makes that commitment does"... by "do what everyone who makes that commitment does" do you mean act superior to others because you consider that there is 1 way and only 1 way of coding?

    Its more than acceptable to use tables for layouts. Neither you or anyone else has proven to me why the use of a table to organize the structure of content is a "bad practice".

    What I do 'get' is like anything, web design has its trends. If you want to not use any table at all for no reason what-so-ever by all means, be my guest, I'm sure it will earn you some cool kid points in the books of others who share the same point of view.

    People are always trying to find means to prove superiority over others... Welcome to the internet.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    Now, the outlying structure of the site is where tables are not meant to be, but if you're only talking about particular pages of your site, then I must assume you're talking about the main content area, not these pages in their entirety, right?
    HAHAHA. Wow...

    Please send me your copy of "proper uses of HTML", I'd love to see where the developers of HTML say you should not use a table for the structure of your design.

    Foolish statement.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Miss Universe 2005 is Miss Canada
    By HenryJ in forum Web Hosting Lounge
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 11-25-2009, 09:42 PM
  2. MySQL doubt: More DB's & less tables || More tables less DB's
    By osphere in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-06-2009, 07:22 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-13-2006, 11:04 AM
  4. MySQL tables inside tables
    By Lem0nHead in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-25-2004, 09:05 PM
  5. Special offer DO NOT MISS! You cannot afford to miss this!
    By Asher S in forum Shared Hosting Offers
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-16-2001, 01:36 AM

Posting Permissions

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