Posted by dorayme on 09/28/67 11:42

In article <GeqdnVW3t5JY9YvZ4p2dnA@giganews.com>,
Jim Moe <jmm-list.AXSPAMGN@sohnen-moe.com> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
> >
> > I hope that not too many of you folk are tearing their hair out
> > at the fact that this impossible dog's breakfast markup results
> > in a look that is nicer than the majority of better coded sites...
> >
> No one has ever said (well, maybe someone has) that beautiful, useful
> websites cannot be done with tables. Obviously there are many that succeed
> wonderfully.

No disagreement here.

> When web designer's are finally re-trained to better use HTML and CSS as
> intended, we'll start seeing sites that are at least as good as those
> created with legacy coding.


Maybe. I hope so. The best eyes have come from the print/paper
industry. Tables, because of their power to mimic via their
splicing abilities, are naturally more congenial to such folk.
Yes, (so the attitude might go) bugger bandwidth, bugger
fluidity, bugger maintenance, bugger those silly little PDAs and
sorry to folks with visual impairments, but my, what counts is
how it looks on a 17" colour screen at 1024 x 768 in millions of
colours...

But things are changing and good eyes belong also to folk coming
thru the ranks as webdesigners from the bottom up...

Perhaps the image of a giant smoking steamroller running over
alt.html is a little overwrought... but, just look out there!

--
dorayme

[Back to original message]