|
|
Posted by TC on 06/19/06 17:28
Philip wrote:
> This same topic was discussed over in
> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html just last week.
> The thread is called "tablles vs css". Here's a link:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html/browse_frm/thread/58f30d17421a21a6/1eca2bfbf251215d?#1eca2bfbf251215d
Hi Philip
IMHO, that thread is not convincing.
Regarding the specific advantages of a CSS-based layout, over a
tables-based one, by my count, of the 16 replies (excluding the OP's
own reply) :
- 8 replies did not cite *any* specific advantages; (#s 2, 5, 6, 11,
12, 13, 16, 17 below)
- 3 replies *disagreed* that tables should never be used for layout (7,
10, 15), and
- 5 replies cited a total of only 3 specific advantages: power &
capability; ease of maintenance; and compliance with current/W3C
standards. (3, 8, 9, 14, 18)
My own site uses tables for page-layout. I do intend to change it to
use CSS, when I redesign the site to move the content to the middle
column of the screen.
However, I also use tables in various places within the pages, to
lay-out certain text and graphics. I'm not convinced that I should go
to the trouble of changing all those. They are *not* a maintenance
problem, and I'm not convinced that the CSS alternative would be any
simpler.
Here's a very simple example: http://102673.atspace.com/tables.htm
What would be a specific, real-world benefit of changing that table to
DIV's + CSS instead?
"It seperates content from presentation" is not - in and of itself - a
benefit. If it was, then, I could equally well say that "tables should
*always* be used for layout", because "this keeps content and
presentation together"!
Any thoughts?
TC (MVP MSAccess)
http://tc2.atspace.com
[thread analysis follows]
=== 2: Chaddy2222 ===
No advantages cited.
=== 3: Philip Semanchuk ===
One specific advantage cited:
- it's much more capable and sophisticated than a tables-based layout.
=== 4: OP ===
(N/A)
=== 5: Sherm Pendley ===
No advantages cited.
=== 6: axlq ===
No advantages cited.
=== 7: Sherm Pendley ===
DISAGREES that tables should never be used for layout:
"if you intend to introduce divs that are used purely for
presentational purposes and have no semantic meaning, then I'd say
there's no point. Misused divs are neither better nor worse than
misused tables."
=== 8: Jim Moe ===
One specific advantage cited:
"Ultimately the best reason to learning HTML+CSS is maintenance. It
truly is a lot easier to make even major changes in appearance when a
site uses HTML+CSS as they are intended.
=== 9: Jack ===
Says that "separating content and presentation is a benefit of using
CSS" - but doesn't say why. Let's be kind, and assume that he said:
"... which makes it easier to maintain and enhance". One specific
advantage.
=== 10: Michael Vilain ===
DISAGREES that tables should never be used for layout:
"if I want a set of three gifs next to each other with caption text
underneath, it's faster and easier (and works on more browsers) to use
a table"
=== 11: Richard Gration ===
No advantages cited.
=== 12: Matt Silberstein ===
No advantages cited.
=== 13: Jim Moe ===
No advantages cited.
=== 14: mens libertina ===
Three specific advantages cited:
- "it is what most(?) people are doing these days". (weak)
- "it is *the* accepted standard that is put forth by the W3C, and as
such, it marks you as a professional."
- "it makes maintainence easier by focusing your design changes to one
page (the style sheet) rather than every single page."
=== 15: Chris F.A. Johnson ===
DISAGREES that tables should never be used for layout:
- There are instances where tables are the better way to accomplish
one's design.
- The ability of tables to adapt themselves to whatever width is
required makes them often indispensible.
- Many CSS hacks make the "umaintainable" tables look like child's
play. [ie. the table might be *easier* to maintain that a CSS
equivalent]
=== 16: Andy Dingley ===
No advantages cited.
=== 17: Chris F.A. Johnson ===
No advantages cited.
=== 18: mens libertina ===
One (weak) advantage cited:
"you should know what is currently popular if you want to be accepted
as a knowledgeable person"
[Knowing what is currently popular, is not an argument for *using* it!]
(END)
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|