|
|
Posted by Charles Sweeney on 11/24/62 11:47
Jim Moe wrote
> Charles Sweeney wrote:
>>
>> Plenty of CSS die-hards use tables for layout. Don't worry about it!
>> Jim Moe does too here:
>> http://sohnen-moe.com/whoweare.php
>> (Do as I say, not as I do.)
>>
> LOL! Yes, there are a few places where that happens. They sidestep
the
> limitations of Internet Explorer and maintain the look of the site.
Its
> original incarnation was massively table-based, six deep in some
places.
>>
>> Just as someone who is interested in Jim's terms of service, won't be
>> bothered by the fact that the link is presented in a table.
>>
> Hmm. It's tabular data.
> Or is it? Would a definition list work better? No, semantically
bogus.
> How about an unordered list? No, there are two aspects: name and
value.
> Lists are one dimensional, not two.
> It's one of those fuzzy areas. I have never decided that using a
table
> was the best choice. Then, of course, there was whole issue with IE
and
> block element centering... <sigh>
Good luck anyway, Jim!
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|