Posted by Jim S on 10/01/07 23:13

On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 08:06:44 +1000, dorayme wrote:

> In article <t26fb9rfiguy$.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>,
> Jim S <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Almost all the many pages on my website look something like this
>> http://www.jimscot.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Jims_pictures/Jimspics_14_wave.html
>> Is there any advantage to doing away with the 'table' as a placeholder?
>> If so, could someone please show me how to do it?
>
> "table as a placeholder" presumably means "table for layout". I
> mention this to help you search the many times this has been
> discussed here. There are several things that you could be asking
> here:
>
> (1) Why is table for layout bad in general? (you won't get too
> much these days from many experts here because they would be
> tired of answering this). Yes, there are advantages, they are of
> a *general kind*, it has been greatly discussed.
>
> (2) Is it worth changing a table layout site to one that conforms
> to better practise? If it is an evolving site, and will have a
> future, be updated regularly and get new sections etc, yes, it
> will gain all the advantages from accruing from the above. If it
> is not, if it is a legacy piece, still of interest, if it is also
> large and complicated, the answer is probably not.
>
> (3) As for your particular page above, it is an example of many,
> the changes would be very easy and useful because you might
> improve some things while at it - for example, in Safari, the fwd
> and back buttons are way down at the bottom of a page. The
> caption is way down from the pic. It looks odd on a big screen
> and involves greater travel for the mouse. Making a page for
> these pics with a caption, and forward and back button would be
> very simple, involve less code (less css and less html) than what
> you have. I would be happy to give you a demo if you are
> interested as I am sure would others.
>
> ---------
> btw, in your css you have an unwanted character before your
> table.sample { (i>>?table.sample {)

Not here I haven't.

Anyhow, yes I am asking for a demo.
I simply have never been able to find a simpler way of presenting the
pictures in a way that keeps them within the bounds of an 800x600 layout
(and bigger), centralised. The buttons are meant to be in the lowest bottom
corners of the screen.
--
Jim S
Tyneside UK
www.jimscott.co.uk

[Back to original message]