God I miss tables-help needed!

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Paul Watt, Apr 4, 2006.

  1. Paul Watt

    Paul Watt Guest

    Hi again,
    Ok so I've got two new problems with this layout
    http://www.paulwatt.info/test/turn/

    1) When I increase the width of the Maincontent Div from 73% to 74% to line
    it up with the right hand side of the page, the whole div drops to below the
    level of the leftcell div. put it back to 73% and it goes back to its
    correct posistion.

    2) It looks fine in IE but a absolute dogs dinner in FF. whys this?

    Thanks once again for all your help! This would be soooooo easy to do with
    the good old <table> tag!

    Paul

    http://www.paulwatt.info
     
    Paul Watt, Apr 4, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Watt

    GreyWyvern Guest

    And lo, Paul Watt didst speak in
    alt.html,alt.www.webmaster,comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:

    > Hi again,
    > Ok so I've got two new problems with this layout
    > http://www.paulwatt.info/test/turn/
    >
    > 1) When I increase the width of the Maincontent Div from 73% to 74% to
    > line
    > it up with the right hand side of the page, the whole div drops to below
    > the
    > level of the leftcell div. put it back to 73% and it goes back to its
    > correct posistion.
    >
    > 2) It looks fine in IE but a absolute dogs dinner in FF. whys this?
    >
    > Thanks once again for all your help! This would be soooooo easy to do
    > with the good old <table> tag!


    Paul, you are taking the table-layout mode of thought and trying to force
    it upon CSS and expecting it to comply. These blocks are still "cells" to
    you, which is likely why you feel the need to over-specify properties on
    them. Relax, and remember that the more CSS you have, the harder it is to
    debug. Keep things simple, the default styles on the block elements you
    are using already provide for most of what you are trying to do.

    First, remove the width property from the .maincontent rule entirely.
    <div>'s expand to fit all available horizontal space by default, so the
    margin-left property is the only width-limiting style you require here.

    To change how far the .maincontent div sits apart from the menu, just
    change the value of the margin-left property. That's it.

    Grey

    --
    The technical axiom that nothing is impossible sinisterly implies the
    pitfall corollary that nothing is ridiculous.
    - http://www.greywyvern.com/orca#search - Orca Search: Full-featured
    spider and site-search engine
     
    GreyWyvern, Apr 4, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Watt

    Richard Guest

    Grey,

    Am I correct in inferring from this thread that tables are being
    superceded by divs for layout. Could you point me to some website(s)
    that discuss this evolution?

    Many thanks,
    Richard
     
    Richard, Apr 4, 2006
    #3
  4. Paul Watt

    Karl Groves Guest

    Karl Groves, Apr 4, 2006
    #4
  5. Paul Watt

    kchayka Guest

    Paul Watt wrote:
    > Hi again,
    > Ok so I've got two new problems with this layout


    Why don't you go find yourself a nice CSS book? Need I mention that you
    should read it, too? ;)

    While you're at it, get a few well-tested, ready-made templates to
    study, and learn from them. You can start here:
    <URL:http://css-discuss.incutio.com/>

    And make use of google groups for the 1 thing it is good at: a
    searchable archive of usenet posts. You aren't doing anything that
    hasn't been done countless times before, you know.

    Learn to help yourself first. Come here when you get stuck, but don't
    come here first, eh? This isn't a help desk, you know.

    --
    Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
    Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
     
    kchayka, Apr 4, 2006
    #5
  6. Paul Watt

    Nik Coughlin Guest

    Richard wrote:
    > Grey,
    >
    > Am I correct in inferring from this thread that tables are being
    > superceded by divs for layout. Could you point me to some website(s)
    > that discuss this evolution?
    >
    > Many thanks,
    > Richard


    Not so much replaced as divs as replaced by semantic markup with
    presentation controlled with CSS.

    A good place to start:
    http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/

    Others:
    http://alistapart.com/
    http://benmeadowcroft.com/webdev/
    http://csszengarden.com/
    http://glish.com/css/
    http://internalysis.com/css.html
    http://mezzoblue.com/archives/css/
    http://porjes.com/example_css.html
    http://positioniseverything.net/
    http://thenoodleincident.com/tutorials/css/index.html
    http://tjkdesign.com/articles/
    http://tobyinkster.co.uk/web
    http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/
    http://www.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie/index.htm
     
    Nik Coughlin, Apr 5, 2006
    #6
  7. Paul Watt

    Tony Guest

    Richard wrote:
    > Grey,
    >
    > Am I correct in inferring from this thread that tables are being
    > superceded by divs for layout. Could you point me to some website(s)
    > that discuss this evolution?


    I don't mean to sound rude, but you are WAY behind the times on this.

    Study up on CSS - that will give you at least a basis to start from. The
    tutorial at w3schools is a decent start.
     
    Tony, Apr 5, 2006
    #7
  8. Paul Watt

    Richard Guest

    Hi Karl,

    > http://w3.org


    Good point. I found a good "con" article there. I'll look at the site
    further.

    Thanks for you guidance. I guess I could have thought of that myself,
    but I wanted to see the best places to look.

    Regards,
    Richard
     
    Richard, Apr 5, 2006
    #8
  9. Paul Watt

    Richard Guest

    Hi Nik,

    > Not so much replaced as divs as replaced by semantic markup with

    presentation controlled with CSS.

    At first glance, it sounds like a good idea.

    > A good place to start:

    http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/

    That was a good place to start! I get the idea now and follow their
    guidelines to see how it turns out on stuff I'm working on now.

    > Others:


    Thanks for the list. I'll take a look at them from time to time.

    Regards,
    Richard
     
    Richard, Apr 5, 2006
    #9
  10. Tony wrote:
    > Richard wrote:
    >
    >> Grey,
    >>
    >> Am I correct in inferring from this thread that tables are being
    >> superceded by divs for layout. Could you point me to some website(s)
    >> that discuss this evolution?

    >
    >
    > I don't mean to sound rude, but you are WAY behind the times on this.
    >
    > Study up on CSS - that will give you at least a basis to start from. The
    > tutorial at w3schools is a decent start.


    I think you and many others are confusing content and markup.
    If the data to be displayed is tabular, I'd choose tables over div,
    simply coz' I want the page to be legible unstyled as well.
    I never read the table tag is being deprecated or obsolete. But then
    again, there's so many things I haven't read yet.

    I'd advise to start a page design by properly choosing the right html
    tags for the page elements. Then use CSS to make a nice(r) layout.
    Add divs where needed, but at all cost avoid the omnipresent div soup.
    Some folks just replaced all their former tag soup for a different soup
    flavour.

    If your page looks like faeces when viewed unstyled, there's a good
    chance you have started the wrong way. And I am willing to admit I
    created enough examples of 'the wrong way' myself.

    Did I grasp correctly this is the point Richard was trying to make?

    Sh.
     
    Schraalhans Keukenmeester, Apr 5, 2006
    #10
  11. Paul Watt

    Richard Guest

    Hi Tony,

    > I don't mean to sound rude, but you are WAY behind the times on this.


    You got that right! :) I'm just starting to put up a technical
    presentation on a web server, so I'm interested in applying the best
    techniques while ensuring I get the job done in a timely fashion. So
    I've employed some CSS stuff, some Table stuff, some site navigation.
    And I've trolled Google Groups once in while to get current ideas about
    this stuff. The idea in this thread, crudely stated, seemed to be
    Tables:bad, CSS:good. I wanted to get some sense of this now, long
    before I become a CSS guru. Hence my question, which elicited some
    good ideas that I'll start applying pronto.

    So, no offense taken ... because I surely am "WAY behind the times on
    this".

    Regards,
    Richard
     
    Richard, Apr 5, 2006
    #11
  12. Paul Watt

    Ed Jay Guest

    Richard scribed:

    >Hi Tony,
    >
    >> I don't mean to sound rude, but you are WAY behind the times on this.

    >
    >You got that right! :) I'm just starting to put up a technical
    >presentation on a web server, so I'm interested in applying the best
    >techniques while ensuring I get the job done in a timely fashion. So
    >I've employed some CSS stuff, some Table stuff, some site navigation.
    >And I've trolled Google Groups once in while to get current ideas about
    >this stuff. The idea in this thread, crudely stated, seemed to be
    >Tables:bad, CSS:good.


    No. Tables have their proper place...presenting tabular data.

    >I wanted to get some sense of this now, long
    >before I become a CSS guru. Hence my question, which elicited some
    >good ideas that I'll start applying pronto.
    >
    >So, no offense taken ... because I surely am "WAY behind the times on
    >this".
    >
    >Regards,
    >Richard

    --
    Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)
     
    Ed Jay, Apr 5, 2006
    #12
  13. Paul Watt

    Richard Guest

    Hi Schraalhans,

    > Did I grasp correctly this is the point Richard was trying to make?


    You certainly did. Of all the responses I've gotten, Tony has been
    closest to providing suggestions about sites relevant to my question,
    which I'll be referencing from time to time to improve my practices.

    I agree with your assessment that manure, no matter how decoratively
    presented, still reeks. And with thoughless tagging leads to an
    unmanageble mess.

    Regards,
    Richard
     
    Richard, Apr 5, 2006
    #13
  14. Paul Watt

    Richard Guest

    Hi Ed,

    > No. Tables have their proper place...presenting tabular data.


    Right. I got this clearly spelled out in the first reference Tony
    pointed me to.

    Thanks,
    Richard
     
    Richard, Apr 5, 2006
    #14
  15. Paul Watt

    Nik Coughlin Guest

    Richard wrote:
    > Hi Ed,
    >
    >> No. Tables have their proper place...presenting tabular data.

    >
    > Right. I got this clearly spelled out in the first reference Tony
    > pointed me to.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Richard


    Nik, Tony, it's all the same :)
     
    Nik Coughlin, Apr 5, 2006
    #15
  16. Paul Watt

    JDS Guest

    On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 15:49:12 +0100, Paul Watt wrote:

    > 2) It looks fine in IE but a absolute dogs dinner in FF. whys this?


    I haven't looked yet. Here is a suggestion anyways, based on the fact
    that in actuality, FF (and Opera, and, to some extent, Safari/Konqueror)
    renders CSS much more "correctly" than MSIE.

    When trying to develop a CSS layout, make it work in FF or other "good"
    CSS browser FIRST. *Then* tweak it to make it look right in MSIE. This
    will save you time and headaches, IMO. It is much easier to develop a CSS
    layout when the CSS works in the browser as expected, and without CSS bugs
    or unsupported CSS features.

    --
    JDS | lid
    | http://www.newtnotes.com
    DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/
     
    JDS, Apr 5, 2006
    #16
  17. Paul Watt

    JDS Guest

    On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 18:04:09 -0700, Richard wrote:

    > You got that right! :) I'm just starting to put up a technical
    > presentation on a web server, so I'm interested in applying the best
    > techniques while ensuring I get the job done in a timely fashion. So
    > I've employed some CSS stuff, some Table stuff, some site navigation.


    For layouts, use *either* CSS *OR* tables[1], but please not both. Unless
    a table is being used as intended: for tabular data (and a lot of things
    fall into that category).

    In general, for a CSS layout, my "best practices" are as follows:

    1) Start with a plain vanilla HTML 4.01 strict page which has absolutely
    zero author-imposed layou or design characteristics. USE SEMANTICALLY
    CORRECT HTML!! That is to say, a pargraph uses a <P> tag and a list of
    items uses <UL> or <OL> and <LI> tags, etc. DO NOT USE <DIV>s FOR
    EVERYTHIGN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    2) Give classes and/or Id's to every element. Remeber, an element can
    have more than one class. Also, each ID must be unique!

    3) Take an image of what you want the layout to look like and start
    applying CSS layout rules. This last bit is the tricky part, of course.
    Also, you can start to add a smattering of <DIV>s here and there to force
    the layout how you want it. But use pure <DIV>s sparingly!!

    Why the warnings against DIVs? A <DIV> has no real semantic meaning and
    using only <DIV>s will create a (valid, yes) HTML page that is not search
    optimizable, not "508" accessible, and ultimately not as flexible as one
    that uses "proper" HTML markup as HTML was intended to be used.

    later...




    [1] Some will say "never use tables anymore for layout" but I don't
    completely agree, for a few reasons. For myself, though, I have stopped
    using tables for layout.

    --
    JDS | lid
    | http://www.newtnotes.com
    DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/
     
    JDS, Apr 5, 2006
    #17
  18. Paul Watt

    axlq Guest

    In article <>, Nik Coughlin <> wrote:
    >Richard wrote:
    >A good place to start:
    >http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/


    You're right, that's nice. They don't take the hard-line religious
    viewpoint that all layout MUST be done in CSS. They do agree that
    tables have uses in layout.

    I do disagree with their recommendation to eliminate <b> and replace
    it with <strong> -- why waste the extra bytes?

    One thing I've discovered that forces me into a table layout is
    the fact that I have tabular data to display within the layout. I
    learned that if I use CSS layout and then try to display a table,
    the CSS box boundaries don't necessarily follow or contain the
    table boundaries -- especially if the table uses % widths. Or I
    get nonsensical repositioning of my CSS elements that contain the
    table. And the behavior isn't consistent across browsers. This
    is unacceptable. Using a simple 2-column table for layout allows
    me to display actual tabular data in each column without blowing
    the box boundaries, and I use CSS for controlling the appearance of
    everything else.

    -A
     
    axlq, Apr 5, 2006
    #18
  19. Paul Watt

    Tony Guest

    Richard wrote:
    > Hi Tony,
    >
    >>I don't mean to sound rude, but you are WAY behind the times on this.

    >
    >
    > You got that right! :) I'm just starting to put up a technical
    > presentation on a web server, so I'm interested in applying the best
    > techniques while ensuring I get the job done in a timely fashion. So
    > I've employed some CSS stuff, some Table stuff, some site navigation.
    > And I've trolled Google Groups once in while to get current ideas about
    > this stuff. The idea in this thread, crudely stated, seemed to be
    > Tables:bad, CSS:good. I wanted to get some sense of this now, long
    > before I become a CSS guru. Hence my question, which elicited some
    > good ideas that I'll start applying pronto.


    Good way to approach it.

    I think that, as you apply more CSS and move away from tables, you will
    find that CSS provides greater flexibility in many ways, and is actually
    far more powerful for rendering a solidly designed site - once you know
    your way around it.

    And I'll freely admit that there are still times that I find a simple
    table works better to accomplish my design goals. I do try to stay away
    from that, but you work with what you're given :)


    > So, no offense taken ... because I surely am "WAY behind the times on
    > this".


    I appreciate that you took my comment as intended. Good luck with your
    learning!
     
    Tony, Apr 5, 2006
    #19
  20. Paul Watt

    Tony Guest

    Nik Coughlin wrote:
    > Richard wrote:
    >
    >>Hi Ed,
    >>
    >>
    >>>No. Tables have their proper place...presenting tabular data.

    >>
    >>Right. I got this clearly spelled out in the first reference Tony
    >>pointed me to.
    >>
    >>Thanks,
    >>Richard

    >
    >
    > Nik, Tony, it's all the same :)
    >


    I should probably stop talking to myself, then
     
    Tony, Apr 5, 2006
    #20
    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. Lukasz Lacki

    god damn ViewState.

    Lukasz Lacki, Nov 14, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    578
    Lukasz Lacki
    Nov 14, 2003
  2. André Almeida Maldonado

    Oh My God!!! Can't open Web project

    André Almeida Maldonado, Jan 7, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,975
    =?Utf-8?B?bC10b3VjaGVk?=
    Jan 7, 2004
  3. Developwebsites
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    574
    Mitja
    Dec 9, 2004
  4. np
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    318
  5. Bo Yang
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    376
    kwikius
    Dec 17, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page