Making a table with divs

J

Jonathan N. Little

That's probably not what you meant to say?!
It was supposed to have been aesthetic, but must have been
'auto-corrected' on me because I had composed the message that time in
MSWord...serves me right! Stick with SeaMonkey!
 
R

rfr

It is still faster, more cross-browser reliable to use tables as a means to
handle the layout placement / display of material.

And there are more tools availble to accomplish this with tables than with
divs.

Do you want to spend hours on a task, or minutes?

What tools are there for the millions of occasional or intermittent Internet
authors? Tables! That is about it!

So, all you purists, while technically exact, are missing the point.

Tables work! They are cross-browser. They are reliable. They are easy for
masses of people to visually understand because they are a familiar concept.
There are software tools to help develop tables and trouble shoot them.

Layers and positioning concepts do NOT yet work reliably cross-browser and
there are not tools to develope them that can be used by the common masses
of people.

I wish there were ways to reliably, fast use CSS. But, until there are, I
will continue to use table for layout control in many areas . . . not all .
.. but many.
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, "Jonathan N. Little"
It was supposed to have been aesthetic, but must have been
'auto-corrected' on me because I had composed the message that time in
MSWord...serves me right! Stick with SeaMonkey!

That's good to know. For a while there I thought you meant visiting your
site was a numbing experience.
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind said:
It is still faster, more cross-browser reliable to use tables as a
means to handle the layout placement / display of material.

And there are more tools availble to accomplish this with tables than
with divs.

Do you want to spend hours on a task, or minutes?

What tools are there for the millions of occasional or intermittent
Internet authors? Tables! That is about it!

So, all you purists, while technically exact, are missing the point.

Tables work! They are cross-browser. They are reliable. They are easy
for masses of people to visually understand because they are a
familiar concept. There are software tools to help develop tables and
trouble shoot them.

Layers and positioning concepts do NOT yet work reliably cross-browser
and there are not tools to develope them that can be used by the
common masses of people.

I wish there were ways to reliably, fast use CSS. But, until there
are, I will continue to use table for layout control in many areas . .
. not all . . but many.

So you're saying tables are for amateurs? -Agreed.
 
D

dorayme

Jonathan N. Little said:
My site is very anesthetic

You mean it will induce insensitivity to pain? Surely one of your
sites, Jonathan, would not need to be this?
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

Neredbojias said:
To further the education of mankind, "Jonathan N. Little"


That's good to know. For a while there I thought you meant visiting your
site was a numbing experience.

Damn! I gotta proof better before I post! Zzzzzzzzz or stop typing under
the influence.
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

dorayme said:
You mean it will induce insensitivity to pain? Surely one of your
sites, Jonathan, would not need to be this?

Aw, come on! mumble, mumble, mumble...
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, "Jonathan N. Little"
Damn! I gotta proof better before I post! Zzzzzzzzz or stop typing
under the influence.

Hehe, I've done the same thing (-well, maybe not with such flair) myself.
In this instance, the slip was cool.
 
B

Blinky the Shark

Neredbojias said:
To further the education of mankind, Blinky the Shark


When was the last time you heard of anyone paying a shark for services
rendered?

I heard Jaws got scale, even though he had none...
 
J

Jim Moe

rfr said:
It is still faster, more cross-browser reliable to use tables as a means to
handle the layout placement / display of material.
Wrong. It is only faster because you are accustomed to doing layout that
way.
So, all you purists, while technically exact, are missing the point.
No, you are.
Tables-for-layout perpetuates ignorance about what HTML is and how its
design intent. HTML is a MARKUP language; it's very name provides a clue
to this concept. Markup means adding semantic structure the content (this
is a heading level 1, this is a paragraph, this is emphasized, this is a
list, etc.).
Layers and positioning concepts do NOT yet work reliably cross-browser and
there are not tools to develop them that can be used by the common masses
of people.
It is sad statement about the industry that such a lack of standards
conformance is so accepted, that one abusive monopoly has done so little
to update its browser to current practice, that tool makers are so limited
in their technical capability that they cannot produce a tool to create
flexible, designed-for-the-web pages.
 
A

Alan J. Flavell

It is still faster, more cross-browser reliable to use tables as a
means to handle the layout placement / display of material.

Oh, quite. "What the author sees is exactly what everyone must get",
no matter what their browsing situation or needs. That's just what
the WWW does NOT need.

If you're so locked in to Only One True Layout for your content, maybe
you'd be happier with PDF? This isn't how the web was meant to work,
and at last (after some wasted years being side-tracked by
presentational pseudo-HTML), we're increasingly able to Do It Right,
and not have to make do with techniques which were designed for quite
something else (in this case: tables for expressing relationships
between data).
And there are more tools availble to accomplish this with tables
than with divs.

If I need a screwdriver, should I be pleased to be told that there's
an ample choice of hammers?
So, all you purists, while technically exact, are missing the point.

Pot, kettle, black.
Tables work!

Only too true. These misguided one-size-forced-to-fit-all designs
insist on "working" - in the sense of trying to impose what the author
saw in his/her authoring situation - no matter how inappropriate that
may be to each and every user's own browsing situation and needs.

But, as has been known for a long time now, "force" doesn't really
work on the WWW. It may give some misguided authors a feeling of
power to think that they are specifying an exact visual result - but
that isn't what really happens when their stuff gets out into a
general WWW context.
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, Blinky the Shark
I heard Jaws got scale, even though he had none...

That's what they _told_ him, but in the end he ended up being so much sea
fertilizer and certainly unable to collect anything but crabs and bacteria.

Oh, sorry, I was a bit insensitive there, presuming Jaws is your hero and
all. If it makes you feel any better, I never liked The Dolphins.
 
B

Blinky the Shark

Neredbojias said:
To further the education of mankind, Blinky the Shark


That's what they _told_ him, but in the end he ended up being so much sea
fertilizer and certainly unable to collect anything but crabs and
bacteria.

Some should bring the bastages to justice!
Oh, sorry, I was a bit insensitive there, presuming Jaws is your hero and
all. If it makes you feel any better, I never liked The Dolphins.

Hell, I've never seen Jaws. :)
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,483
Members
44,903
Latest member
orderPeak8CBDGummies

Latest Threads

Top