tables it is

Discussion in 'HTML' started by richard, Nov 30, 2009.

  1. richard

    richard Guest

    richard, Nov 30, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. richard

    SAZ Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    >
    > http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php
    >
    > at least the information is presented the way I want.
    > and FF 3.5 gets it right!


    For all the conversations that have taken place in these forums, and all
    the comments about tables are for tabular data only, I use them whenever
    it suits my purpose or if I'm fed up with trying to get my CSS to work
    in IE.
    SAZ, Nov 30, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Nov 30, 5:47 pm, SAZ <saz1958@!nospammersexcite.com> wrote:
    > >http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php
    > > at least the information is presented the way I want.
    > > and FF 3.5 gets it right!

    > For all the conversations that have taken place in these forums, and all
    > the comments about tables are for tabular data only, I use them whenever
    > it suits my purpose or if I'm fed up with trying to get my CSS to work
    > in IE.


    My mantra in this group for the last 7 years has been to use what ever
    technology you need to produce a website that is most productive for
    your needs. This can range from plain text to fancy video integrated
    flash to what ever. It can be different for every website.
    Travis Newbury, Nov 30, 2009
    #3
  4. richard

    rf Guest

    "SAZ" <saz1958@!nospammersexcite.com> wrote in message
    news:-september.org...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    >>
    >> http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php
    >>
    >> at least the information is presented the way I want.
    >> and FF 3.5 gets it right!

    >
    > For all the conversations that have taken place in these forums, and all
    > the comments about tables are for tabular data only, I use them whenever
    > it suits my purpose or if I'm fed up with trying to get my CSS to work
    > in IE.


    Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I happened
    to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/
    rf, Nov 30, 2009
    #4
  5. richard

    SAZ Guest

    In article <amYQm.59065$>,
    lid says...
    >
    > "SAZ" <saz1958@!nospammersexcite.com> wrote in message
    > news:-september.org...
    > > In article <>,
    > > says...
    > >>
    > >> http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php
    > >>
    > >> at least the information is presented the way I want.
    > >> and FF 3.5 gets it right!

    > >
    > > For all the conversations that have taken place in these forums, and all
    > > the comments about tables are for tabular data only, I use them whenever
    > > it suits my purpose or if I'm fed up with trying to get my CSS to work
    > > in IE.

    >
    > Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    > elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I happened
    > to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    > http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/


    I'm not talking about a specific conversation, but many table
    conversations over the past 8 years I've been watching this group. I
    can't count how many times "tabular data" was mentioned as the only
    proper use for a table.
    SAZ, Nov 30, 2009
    #5
  6. richard

    richard Guest

    On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:33:19 -0600, SAZ wrote:

    > In article <amYQm.59065$>,
    > lid says...
    >>
    >> "SAZ" <saz1958@!nospammersexcite.com> wrote in message
    >> news:-september.org...
    >>> In article <>,
    >>> says...
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php
    >>>>
    >>>> at least the information is presented the way I want.
    >>>> and FF 3.5 gets it right!
    >>>
    >>> For all the conversations that have taken place in these forums, and all
    >>> the comments about tables are for tabular data only, I use them whenever
    >>> it suits my purpose or if I'm fed up with trying to get my CSS to work
    >>> in IE.

    >>
    >> Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    >> elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I happened
    >> to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    >> http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/

    >
    > I'm not talking about a specific conversation, but many table
    > conversations over the past 8 years I've been watching this group. I
    > can't count how many times "tabular data" was mentioned as the only
    > proper use for a table.


    Precisely. While in the real world of paper, tables are used for tabular
    data. Hence the name.
    In the HTML world, tables is/are merely a tool to use for what ever reason
    you need one.

    As I mentioned in my post about that screwed up page, that IE got it right,
    I do not believe it was the fault of the coding. More than that it is the
    fault of the browser and how it interprets the code.

    In the early stages of the internet, what else was there? I too am totally
    sick and tired of hearing that tables are for tabular data.
    richard, Dec 1, 2009
    #6
  7. richard

    richard Guest

    On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:15:18 GMT, rf wrote:

    > "SAZ" <saz1958@!nospammersexcite.com> wrote in message
    > news:-september.org...
    >> In article <>,
    >> says...
    >>>
    >>> http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php
    >>>
    >>> at least the information is presented the way I want.
    >>> and FF 3.5 gets it right!

    >>
    >> For all the conversations that have taken place in these forums, and all
    >> the comments about tables are for tabular data only, I use them whenever
    >> it suits my purpose or if I'm fed up with trying to get my CSS to work
    >> in IE.

    >
    > Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    > elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I happened
    > to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    > http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/


    Had you used IE you would have seen it properly.
    Now I'm going to have to get my attorney Ornery Taiters to work and sue
    your ass off for intellectual theft, you dirty scoundrel you.
    richard, Dec 1, 2009
    #7
  8. rf wrote:

    > Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    > elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I happened
    > to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    > http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/


    Exactly! Just to show that it is possible, confined outer DIV to force
    the wrap...


    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
    <html>
    <head>
    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
    <meta http-equiv="content-language" content="en-us">
    <title>template</title>

    <style type="text/css">
    div.questionaire {
    padding: 1em; width: 20em; background: #eee; border: 1px solid #000;
    }
    div.questionaire ul {
    list-style: none; margin: 1em; padding: 0;
    }
    div.questionaire input {
    width: 2em; margin-left: -3em; margin-right: .75em;
    }

    div.questionaire li {
    margin: 0 0 1em 3em; padding: .25em; border: 1px solid red;
    background: #ffd;
    }

    </style>

    </head>
    <body>
    <form>
    <div class="questionaire">
    <p>Who is an amateur operator as defined in Part 97?</p>
    <ul>
    <li><input name="pick" value="A" type="submit"> A person named in an
    amateur operator/primary license grant in the FCC ULS database</li>
    <li><input name="pick" value="B" type="submit"> A person who has passed
    a written license examination.</li>
    <li><input name="pick" value="C" type="submit"> The person named on the
    FCC Form 605 application</li>
    <li><input name="pick" value="D" type="submit"> A person holding a
    Resticted Operating Permit</li>
    </ul>
    </div>
    </form>
    </body>
    </html>



    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Dec 1, 2009
    #8
  9. richard

    rf Guest

    "richard" <> wrote in message
    news:1j8nktoy1dyet$...
    > On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:15:18 GMT, rf wrote:
    >
    >> "SAZ" <saz1958@!nospammersexcite.com> wrote in message
    >> news:-september.org...
    >>> In article <>,
    >>> says...
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php
    >>>>
    >>>> at least the information is presented the way I want.
    >>>> and FF 3.5 gets it right!
    >>>
    >>> For all the conversations that have taken place in these forums, and all
    >>> the comments about tables are for tabular data only, I use them whenever
    >>> it suits my purpose or if I'm fed up with trying to get my CSS to work
    >>> in IE.

    >>
    >> Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    >> elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I
    >> happened
    >> to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    >> http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/

    >
    > Had you used IE you would have seen it properly.


    Only because of your errors. You are running the browsers in quirks mode,
    which everybody else knows is not the thing to do. With quirks mode IE
    carefully reproduces all the bugs back to release 5. The fact that you saw
    something that looked slightly like you might have wanted it to look is
    merely the serendipitous side effect of a known set of bugs. Do you really
    want to base all your future coding efforts on the side effect of known
    bugs?

    When I put in a valid doctype that triggers standards mode IE does the right
    thing and displays the page almost exactly as FF does, because from what you
    have told the browsers that is how it *should* look. Have another look at
    the above URL. Using IE.

    > Now I'm going to have to get my attorney Ornery Taiters to work and sue
    > your ass off for intellectual theft, you dirty scoundrel you.


    ROFL.

    To be sued for intellectual theft I would have had to have stolen something
    of intellectual worth.

    You are still missing a form element and those buttons still should be radio
    buttons and not submit buttons. And your name/value pairs are duplicated in
    each section. Just anticipating your next set of questions :)
    rf, Dec 1, 2009
    #9
  10. richard

    richard Guest

    On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:28:26 -0500, Jonathan N. Little wrote:

    > rf wrote:
    >
    >> Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    >> elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I happened
    >> to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    >> http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/

    >
    > Exactly! Just to show that it is possible, confined outer DIV to force
    > the wrap...
    >
    >


    Most interesting. thanks.
    I did find out though that one reason why it wasn't working as expected is
    because I had "display:inline" in the css. It is a tad better to use
    "float:left" instead, which allows the use of width.
    And firefox 3.5 seems to like that.

    Any particular reason for placing the whole thing in a form tag?
    richard, Dec 1, 2009
    #10
  11. richard

    rf Guest

    "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote in message
    news:hf1v0c$8ip$-september.org...
    > rf wrote:
    >
    >> Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    >> elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I
    >> happened
    >> to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    >> http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/

    >
    > Exactly! Just to show that it is possible, confined outer DIV to force the
    > wrap...


    <snip code>

    Much prettier :)
    rf, Dec 1, 2009
    #11
  12. richard

    rf Guest

    "richard" <> wrote in message
    news:dm913jakilr8$.1d1pzogzngy5z$...
    > On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:28:26 -0500, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    >
    >> rf wrote:
    >>
    >>> Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    >>> elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I
    >>> happened
    >>> to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    >>> http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/

    >>
    >> Exactly! Just to show that it is possible, confined outer DIV to force
    >> the wrap...
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Most interesting. thanks.
    > I did find out though that one reason why it wasn't working as expected is
    > because I had "display:inline" in the css. It is a tad better to use
    > "float:left" instead, which allows the use of width.
    > And firefox 3.5 seems to like that.
    >
    > Any particular reason for placing the whole thing in a form tag?


    How else is anything going to get submitted to your server?
    rf, Dec 1, 2009
    #12
  13. richard

    richard Guest

    On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 02:57:14 GMT, rf wrote:

    > "richard" <> wrote in message
    > news:dm913jakilr8$.1d1pzogzngy5z$...
    >> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:28:26 -0500, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    >>
    >>> rf wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Such was not the case here. The issue was a misuse of unordered list
    >>>> elements and list item elements. Did you look at the prior page? I
    >>>> happened
    >>>> to have it still open in a browser so could save a copy:
    >>>> http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/
    >>>
    >>> Exactly! Just to show that it is possible, confined outer DIV to force
    >>> the wrap...
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Most interesting. thanks.
    >> I did find out though that one reason why it wasn't working as expected is
    >> because I had "display:inline" in the css. It is a tad better to use
    >> "float:left" instead, which allows the use of width.
    >> And firefox 3.5 seems to like that.
    >>
    >> Any particular reason for placing the whole thing in a form tag?

    >
    > How else is anything going to get submitted to your server?


    I understand the form and submission. I am questioning the placement.
    At this point, I am only assuming that by doing so, this acts as a "catch
    all" thing so that which ever button is clicked, that is the value to be
    passed correct? Instead of each button being a seperate form.
    richard, Dec 1, 2009
    #13
  14. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    richard <> wrote:

    > In the HTML world, tables is/are merely a tool to use for what ever reason
    > you need one.


    I would say "are" but also I would say they are not.

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Dec 1, 2009
    #14
  15. richard

    rf Guest

    "richard" <> wrote in message
    news:h3wdg8rvokb.1vkdr68oo3d74$...
    > On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 02:57:14 GMT, rf wrote:
    >
    >> "richard" <> wrote in message
    >> news:dm913jakilr8$.1d1pzogzngy5z$...
    >>> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:28:26 -0500, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Any particular reason for placing the whole thing in a form tag?

    >>
    >> How else is anything going to get submitted to your server?

    >
    > I understand the form and submission.


    But you also need to consider what happens at the server end, that is how
    your PHP code is structured.

    > I am questioning the placement.
    > At this point, I am only assuming that by doing so, this acts as a "catch
    > all" thing so that which ever button is clicked, that is the value to be
    > passed correct? Instead of each button being a seperate form.


    You *could* have a seperate for for each button.

    Sometimes I have several forms on the page. It makes the server side code
    (PHP) a little simpler in many cases as each form can point to a different
    PHP file and that form handler only has to worry about the input fields on
    that particular form.

    Also the fields on the other forms don't need to be transmitted. Note,
    however, that any changes made to the input fields on one form will be
    discarded if another form is submitted. This will become apparent if you
    ever decide to make those buttons radio buttons. Then you *will* need
    exactly one form, to submit all the radio buttons.

    In your case you have only a bunch of submit buttons and only one of them
    will ever be succesful and they are probably all handled by the same PHP
    process, so one form is indicated for the entire page.
    rf, Dec 1, 2009
    #15
  16. Jan C. Faerber, Dec 1, 2009
    #16
  17. richard

    richard Guest

    On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 04:56:52 -0800 (PST), Jan C. Faerber wrote:

    > On Dec 1, 12:15 am, "rf" <> wrote:
    >
    > http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/
    > http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php
    >
    > I understand. You want to use javascript to get the tables position,
    > height and width on the old page and with writeln() on the new page
    > and you create your divs with css.


    why can't php do the same thing?
    User has JS off. Code won't work.
    Can't turn off php so easily.
    richard, Dec 1, 2009
    #17
  18. On Dec 1, 9:06 pm, richard <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 04:56:52 -0800 (PST), Jan C. Faerber wrote:
    > > On Dec 1, 12:15 am, "rf" <> wrote:

    >
    > >http://barefile.com.au/test/richard/
    > >http://www.1littleworld.net/code/z1.php

    >
    > > I understand. You want to use javascript to get the tables position,
    > > height and width on the old page and with writeln() on the new page
    > > and you create your divs with css.

    >
    > why can't php do the same thing?
    > User has JS off. Code won't work.
    > Can't turn off php so easily.


    Yeah - only you need the code to modulate <table>s into
    <style type="text/css">...
    php will be better - it's true!
    Jan C. Faerber, Dec 2, 2009
    #18
    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. suzy

    newbie: tables/layout

    suzy, Jul 27, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,009
  2. Lou

    Hash Tables

    Lou, Sep 5, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    6,461
    Richard Grimes [MVP]
    Sep 29, 2003
  3. Peter Bassett
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    924
    Augustus
    Aug 15, 2003
  4. Otuatail

    Tables within tables

    Otuatail, Jul 31, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    494
  5. Chris Brat
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    694
    =?iso-8859-1?q?Luis_M._Gonz=E1lez?=
    Aug 22, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page