|
|
Posted by JDS on 04/10/06 18:58
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 07:56:36 -0700, david.hunter wrote:
> is the 'industry norm' in this case then that's fine by me. :-)
Hmm... "industry norm" seems to me like a weird way to describe this
situation.
A "table" is for tabular data.
One could, perhaps, argue, that yes, in fact, your track list *is* tabular
data. (One could also argue against that point, I think).
Thus the suggestion, "use a table."
However, I like D Déchelotte's suggestion of using a right-justified
list better.
Overall, the point is this:
When using CSS, remember that the HTML is for "MARKUP" and the CSS is for
"LAYOUT". Use the most closely correct HTML markup for each item on a
page. If a thing is a "list" then use <UL> or <OL> with <LI> for the list
items. If a thing is a pargraph, then mark it as such (<p>). And so on.
So if a thing is a table of information that only makes sense when laid
out in rows and columns that relate back to the row and column headings,
then use a <TABLE>. Otherwise, it is probably just a list.
This is called "semantically correct markup".
In actuality, as I look back at your page, (and I see now that you have
tweaked the layout since you posted), the list of tracks is really just a
list and <UL> (or maybe <OL>) is probably more semantically correct. So I
retract my earlier "use a table" suggestion as it is semantically
incorrect.
The best[1] way for you to do this is really to use a list, and then use
CSS tabular layout to lay out the columns. But CSS tables do not work
*at* *all* in a particular browser whose name I withhold (<Cough cough
MSIE cough>) and thus your layout will not work for most of your viewing
audience.
later..
[1] In all things computer related, there is always another "best" way to
do something. So take the word "best" with a grain of salt here.
--
JDS | jeffrey@example.invalid
| http://www.newtnotes.com
DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|