CSS vs. all of that other nasty formatting stuff

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Peter Charles, Jan 21, 2004.

  1. This group introduced me to CSS, for which I am grateful. From there,
    I found a couple of reference books with some basic CSS stuff but
    recent issues with "width" shows that my reference material is
    woefully lacking.

    So two things . . .

    First, any good CSS references stuff on the net that doesn't require
    you to be a CSS expert *before* you read it? I'm not too lazy to do
    my own searches, I just haven't found anything that was decently
    written and organized. As I get older, I have less patience for
    poorly written reference material and less of a willingness to slog
    through it to find the benefit. It would be nice to find some
    reference material that actually started at the beginning then
    progressed through CSS issues in a logical manner. There oughta be a
    law -- don't let geeks write the documentation!! :)

    Secondly, this ng often contains commentary on "don't use this or that
    formatting tags" yet not that many that articulate why. The reasons
    aren't obvious to the uninitiated (like me). If there are meaningful
    reasons beyond coding fads why, for example, tables are "bad" it would
    be good to know. Recently a poster took the time and trouble to
    describe why "justify" is not a good thing to use, in response to one
    of my questions, and I was able exploit the power of CSS to make that
    change very easily. So I had two more reasons to appreciate the value
    of this ng.

    At this moment, I'm trying to find a CSS alternative to using tables
    to ensure that images don't roam all over the screen under different
    resolutions and window sizes. Using tables, I can be reasonable sure
    that my images remain nicely centered no matter how the user has
    configured his/her display. If I can locate a CSS solution, so much
    the better.

    Help me find a decent reference source I won't be asking dumb
    questions in the futue. Talk about an incentive, eh?



    Peter

    turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

    Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharles/streamers/index.html
    Peter Charles, Jan 21, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Peter Charles

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:>
    Peter Charles <> said:

    > This group introduced me to CSS, for which I am grateful.


    you can pay us whenever you're ready.

    > From there, I found a couple of reference books


    when more than enough info is on the net i find it hard to justify the
    cost of a book which are usually around $50-$100 in oz.

    > First, any good CSS references stuff on the net that doesn't require
    > you to be a CSS expert *before* you read it?


    dunno

    > Secondly, this ng often contains commentary on "don't use this or that
    > formatting tags" yet not that many that articulate why.


    said it all before on gazillions of other posts, you get sick of
    continually repeating yourself.

    > The reasons aren't obvious to the uninitiated (like me).


    then you just do a follow up post asking why and someone will explain or
    point you at some links.

    although it is surprising how many people start ranting and raving
    defending their choices rather than asking why they shouldn't/should
    avoid the way they're currently doing something and then rejecting the
    advice/opinions/reasons if they wish.

    > If there are meaningful reasons beyond coding fads


    the only "coding fads" i've seen are people continually doing something
    the wrong way because everyone else is doing it the wrong way.

    > why, for example, tables are "bad"


    tables are meant for tabular data, not layout however tables were the
    only way to achieve layouts a few years ago. with browsers supporting
    css there is no longer a reason to use them. you can achieve more
    complex, easier to maintain, create, modify, accessible and flexible
    designs using css.

    people defending the use of tables for layout just lack the knowledge to
    use css. they're used to the "html way" and probably use a wysinwyg
    (which uses tables for layout) and have only a limited knowledge of
    html. to use css effectively you need to know html.

    > At this moment, I'm trying to find a CSS alternative to using tables
    > to ensure that images don't roam all over the screen under different
    > resolutions and window sizes.


    hard to give a solution with a description like that.

    > Using tables, I can be reasonable sure that my images remain nicely
    > centered no matter how the user has configured his/her display. If I
    > can locate a CSS solution, so much the better.


    have you got a URL to the table version so people can have a look and
    offer some css alternatives?

    > Help me find a decent reference source


    alt.html

    --
    brucie - i usenet nude
    brucie, Jan 21, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Peter Charles

    Mark Parnell Guest

    On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:52:32 +1000, brucie <>
    declared in alt.html:
    >
    >> Help me find a decent reference source

    >
    > alt.html


    I'll second that. I have learnt so much more here than I have everywhere
    else combined.

    --
    Mark Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
    Mark Parnell, Jan 21, 2004
    #3
  4. On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:52:32 +1000, brucie
    <> wrote:

    >in post: <news:>
    >Peter Charles <> said:
    >
    >> This group introduced me to CSS, for which I am grateful.

    >
    >you can pay us whenever you're ready.


    I'll gladly pay you Tuesday . .
    >
    >> From there, I found a couple of reference books

    >
    >when more than enough info is on the net i find it hard to justify the
    >cost of a book which are usually around $50-$100 in oz.
    >

    Exactly.

    >> First, any good CSS references stuff on the net that doesn't require
    >> you to be a CSS expert *before* you read it?

    >
    >dunno


    Check this out:

    http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Guide/Style

    Why not start with "What is a style sheet?" "Why is it useful?" "Why
    is it better than oyther alternatives?", "How do I creat a style
    sheet?" "How do I incorporate one in my HTML code?" "What are some
    typical uses?"

    Instead this guy says, "Let's start with setting the color of the text
    and the background. " and I'm going, "Like, where? How? Why? etc.
    etc."

    It's like me trying to teach you how to tie flies for fishing by
    starting with, "Mustad 9671s are good for nymphs."

    >
    >> Secondly, this ng often contains commentary on "don't use this or that
    >> formatting tags" yet not that many that articulate why.

    >
    >said it all before on gazillions of other posts, you get sick of
    >continually repeating yourself.


    True, but I answer newbie posts in other ngs without expecting the
    newbie to have done hours of research, scanning thousands of posts
    that have little or nothing to do with his/her question. Too many
    irrelevant posts are found in threads with a meaningful title.
    Newsgroups aren't the most efficienet research tools on the planet
    when you have to wade through history. Life sucks, etc. I know.
    This group seems to be more reasonable and helpful than others I
    inhabit -- I suppose I'm testing the limits.

    >
    >> The reasons aren't obvious to the uninitiated (like me).

    >
    >then you just do a follow up post asking why and someone will explain or
    >point you at some links.


    That works sometimes
    >
    >although it is surprising how many people start ranting and raving
    >defending their choices rather than asking why they shouldn't/should
    >avoid the way they're currently doing something and then rejecting the
    >advice/opinions/reasons if they wish.


    If a person asks for help and they don't like the answers, then all it
    takes is a little class to say thanks and move on -- I agree with you.

    >
    >> If there are meaningful reasons beyond coding fads

    >
    >the only "coding fads" i've seen are people continually doing something
    >the wrong way because everyone else is doing it the wrong way.


    Excuse me, but I've seen fads before in other sectors of the computer
    business. It's more than simple ignorance. Fads aren't about doing
    things the wrong way, rather it's the bandwagon effect of the "latest
    and greatest". It's obvious the CSS is vastly superior to putting
    format tags all over the place but is it superior enough to go through
    a lot of bother to avoid using one tag where it's needed?
    >
    >> why, for example, tables are "bad"

    >
    >tables are meant for tabular data, not layout however tables were the
    >only way to achieve layouts a few years ago. with browsers supporting
    >css there is no longer a reason to use them. you can achieve more
    >complex, easier to maintain, create, modify, accessible and flexible
    >designs using css.
    >
    >people defending the use of tables for layout just lack the knowledge to
    >use css. they're used to the "html way" and probably use a wysinwyg
    >(which uses tables for layout) and have only a limited knowledge of
    >html. to use css effectively you need to know html.
    >

    If I had to use wysiwyg html coders, I'd probably give up -- can't
    stand the damn things. I'd use a DOS text editor first.

    >> At this moment, I'm trying to find a CSS alternative to using tables
    >> to ensure that images don't roam all over the screen under different
    >> resolutions and window sizes.

    >
    >hard to give a solution with a description like that.
    >
    >> Using tables, I can be reasonable sure that my images remain nicely
    >> centered no matter how the user has configured his/her display. If I
    >> can locate a CSS solution, so much the better.

    >
    >have you got a URL to the table version so people can have a look and
    >offer some css alternatives?


    http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharles/streamersnew/home.html

    The ccs file refered to in the code only has font format info.

    This page is basically a repeat from my old one. The Fishing Loop
    code has to remain as is. If I don't use tables then the images can
    end up flowing one after the other, occupying space wherever it's
    available. Also, I've noticed that the properties of CSS elements
    sometimes have unexpected affects or don't do what you expect based on
    non-CSS structures. For example, H1 etc. puts in a line feed whether
    you want it or not.

    >
    >> Help me find a decent reference source

    >
    >alt.html


    found that one already :)

    Peter

    turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

    Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharles/streamers/index.html
    Peter Charles, Jan 21, 2004
    #4
  5. Peter Charles wrote:
    > Also, I've noticed that the properties of CSS elements
    > sometimes have unexpected affects or don't do what you expect based on
    > non-CSS structures. For example, H1 etc. puts in a line feed whether
    > you want it or not.


    Not sure how the h1 HTML element is a "CSS structure", but you can
    easily make it inline like this:

    h1 {
    display : inline;
    }
    Leif K-Brooks, Jan 21, 2004
    #5
  6. On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:33:39 GMT, Leif K-Brooks
    <> wrote:

    >Peter Charles wrote:
    >> Also, I've noticed that the properties of CSS elements
    >> sometimes have unexpected affects or don't do what you expect based on
    >> non-CSS structures. For example, H1 etc. puts in a line feed whether
    >> you want it or not.

    >
    >Not sure how the h1 HTML element is a "CSS structure", but you can
    >easily make it inline like this:
    >
    >h1 {
    > display : inline;
    >}


    Obviously, my reference sources for CSS are woefully out of date --
    there's no mention of display: inline;

    I'm currently wading through the CSS2 reference on w3schools.com to
    see what else I'm missing.

    Looks like I may have found some solutions to not using tables as
    well.

    Peter

    turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

    Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharles/streamers/index.html
    Peter Charles, Jan 21, 2004
    #6
  7. Peter Charles

    brucie Guest

    brucie, Jan 21, 2004
    #7
  8. In article <>, Peter Charles
    <> wrote:

    > It's like me trying to teach you how to tie flies for fishing by
    > starting with, "Mustad 9671s are good for nymphs."


    But they "are"! Gotta start somewhere and the hook's a good place if
    you're not an entomologist. Long shank, straight eye from memory. I've
    only tied wooly worms on a 3906 for the last ten years. Since a baby's
    asleep in the room I keep my fly stuff in, I can't go see right now.
    Where were we?

    leo

    --
    <http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>
    Leonard Blaisdell, Jan 21, 2004
    #8
  9. Peter Charles wrote:
    > On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:33:39 GMT, Leif K-Brooks
    > <> wrote:
    >>h1 {
    >> display : inline;
    >>}

    >
    >
    > Obviously, my reference sources for CSS are woefully out of date --
    > there's no mention of display: inline;
    >
    > I'm currently wading through the CSS2 reference on w3schools.com to
    > see what else I'm missing.


    w3schools.com is great, but I think the CSS2 Specification itself is
    quite an easy read too, at least compared to other Specifications <g>:
    <http://w3c.org/TR/CSS2/>


    Matthias
    Matthias Gutfeldt, Jan 21, 2004
    #9
  10. Peter Charles, Jan 21, 2004
    #10
  11. On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 23:41:58 -0800, (Leonard
    Blaisdell) wrote:

    >In article <>, Peter Charles
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> It's like me trying to teach you how to tie flies for fishing by
    >> starting with, "Mustad 9671s are good for nymphs."

    >
    >But they "are"! Gotta start somewhere and the hook's a good place if
    >you're not an entomologist. Long shank, straight eye from memory. I've
    >only tied wooly worms on a 3906 for the last ten years. Since a baby's
    >asleep in the room I keep my fly stuff in, I can't go see right now.
    >Where were we?
    >
    >leo



    Just knew that would smoke out at least one fly tier. :)

    Peter

    turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

    Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharles/streamers/index.html
    Peter Charles, Jan 21, 2004
    #11
  12. On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:50:25 +0100, Matthias Gutfeldt
    <> wrote:

    >Peter Charles wrote:
    >> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:33:39 GMT, Leif K-Brooks
    >> <> wrote:
    >>>h1 {
    >>> display : inline;
    >>>}

    >>
    >>
    >> Obviously, my reference sources for CSS are woefully out of date --
    >> there's no mention of display: inline;
    >>
    >> I'm currently wading through the CSS2 reference on w3schools.com to
    >> see what else I'm missing.

    >
    >w3schools.com is great, but I think the CSS2 Specification itself is
    >quite an easy read too, at least compared to other Specifications <g>:
    ><http://w3c.org/TR/CSS2/>
    >
    >
    >Matthias



    Had a whirl through it -- better than a lot of other stuff I've seen
    so far. At least there's no pretense about being a teaching tool.

    Thanks

    Peter

    turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

    Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharles/streamers/index.html
    Peter Charles, Jan 21, 2004
    #12
  13. In article Peter Charles wrote:
    > On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:33:39 GMT, Leif K-Brooks
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >Peter Charles wrote:
    > >> Also, I've noticed that the properties of CSS elements
    > >> sometimes have unexpected affects or don't do what you expect based on
    > >> non-CSS structures. For example, H1 etc. puts in a line feed whether
    > >> you want it or not.


    Of course, linefeed is only entered using <br> in html and \a in css,
    exeption being pre and some white-space related. All other things that
    look like line feed, aren't.

    > >easily make it inline


    > Obviously, my reference sources for CSS are woefully out of date --
    > there's no mention of display: inline;


    Not out of date, just plain inadequate.
    http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1-961217#display

    > I'm currently wading through the CSS2 reference on w3schools.com to
    > see what else I'm missing.


    I would recommend spec, that someone pointed. I found it much clearer
    than w3scools.com . OTOH, spec hasn't changed (much) in last few years,
    w3scools might. (And I was not good at English at that time...)


    --
    Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
    Saapi lähettää meiliä, jos aihe ei liity ryhmään, tai on yksityinen
    tjsp., mutta älä lähetä samaa viestiä meilitse ja ryhmään.
    Lauri Raittila, Jan 24, 2004
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Dejan Vesic
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    668
    Chee Seong Ong
    Jul 3, 2003
  2. =?Utf-8?B?S29lbiBIb29yZWxiZWtl?=

    Nasty problem with the .net site ...

    =?Utf-8?B?S29lbiBIb29yZWxiZWtl?=, Apr 6, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    450
    =?Utf-8?B?S29lbiBIb29yZWxiZWtl?=
    Apr 7, 2006
  3. Larry Barowski
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    700
    Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
    Sep 11, 2004
  4. PerlFAQ Server
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    119
    PerlFAQ Server
    Jan 27, 2011
  5. PerlFAQ Server
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    106
    PerlFAQ Server
    Feb 24, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page