Re: CSS & tables

Nathan Rixham wrote: > tedd wrote: >> At 2:06 PM -0400 5/15/09, Tom Worster wrote: >>> for one thing, a table is a great way of representing relations >>> (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Relation.html). data tables are the >>> canonical >>> example but very often a form's structure is a relation, e.g. >>> between labels >>> and input fields, or between multiple input fields. >>> >>> some of the best designed and behaving web sites i know use tables >>> in ways >>> that a list apart would consider heathen. >> >> Heresy! :-) >> >> However, there are occasions such as in a calendar where not using a >> table would be more than difficult. I haven't received a decree yet >> as to IF that would be considered column data or not. > > I'm gonna differ on this one, when you simply float each calender item > to the left you're pretty much done, in many cases i find it easier > than tables. > >> I have, and continue to use, tables for forms. The main reason given >> for not using tables is because they are not considered accessible by >> those with disabilities. However, people with disabilities generally >> don't have any problems with forms if the forms are properly labeled. >> So, I think that's acceptable, but am sure heathen in css terms. >> >> But whenever/wherever I can, I try to avoid using tables -- >> especially in layouts. >> > > IMHO the whole css vs table based layouts is a bit pointless, fact is > that as web developers and designers we're struggling to fulfil > clients needs, designers aesthetic demands and end user functionality > using languages that really aren't cut out for the job. > > Sure we can manage to do and hack through things, but the second you > move away from a conventional style document with some hyper links > you've moved outside of the scope of html. So regardless of how we do > it, we're fitting square technologies in to round holes. > > In fact the most fitting use of (x)HTML and CSS I've ever seen are the > RFCs and Specifications on w3c.org - styled usable "documents" - not > what many term as a website, and certainly not a flashy zippy glossy > ecommerce store with a tonne of effects and even more functionality. > > It's a bit like creating a full glossy magazine in ms "paint" I guess. > > so ultimately i guess it's a case of 3 cheers and a round of applause > for anybody who's thus far managed to create a website that works and > that the client likes! > > regards :) > Hear! Hear! ;-) :-) -- Hervé Kempf: "Pour sauver la planète, sortez du capitalisme." ------------------------------------------------------------- Phil Jourdan --- pj@ptahhotep.com http://www.ptahhotep.com http://www.chiccantine.com/andypantry.php