|
|
Posted by Roy A. on 02/27/07 07:01
On 26 Feb, 19:34, Gérard Talbot <newsblahgr...@gtalbot.org> wrote:
> Roy A. wrote :
> > Gérard Talbot skrev:
> >> You could use some 2 columns CSS template instead of using tables.
>
> > Sure you could. This should be simple, but what would you gain.
>
> Well, improved accessibility, easier code maintenance, smaller webpage
> (which brings many benefits), etc
Ok, that sounds good, but I belive there are some downsides.
> Top seven reasons to avoid tables for layouthttp://www.workingwith.me.uk/table_free/seven_reasons_to_go_table_free
1. Tables and CSS isn't mutual exclusive. The diffrence in bandwidth
usage is marginal.
2. You have to structure your content. Don't say you're going to
change the layout with 'position: absolute'.
3. The content should be in logical order whatever you use. Tables
emulated with CSS isn't an exeption.
4. If PDAs and mobile phones can't disable tables, then they are not
good tools to browse the web. An issue to consider, but marginal. But
if that's the case, you shouldn't emulate tables with CSS. Just let it
float.
5. So that's the reason. Three levels of indentation is to
complicated.
6. The content should be in locial order. If you're hiding your
navigation for search engines, you're also hiding the navigation on
PDAs, mobile phones and for users with disabilities.
7. Contents bouncing back and forth will not happen if you're styling
your table correctly.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|