Steve said:
PW wrote in message ...
Lots of Website creators still use tables for layout, (including the
company I work in), because they are easy to use, they are reliable, and
work across all browsers.
No one would want to argue with you on this. But then, can you answer
what are these web designers supposed to say when asked about
- why they use nested tables
- bandwidth-hogging due to tables
- slower parsing and rendering time due to tables
- inability of text-to-speech browsers and other small screen devices to
render accordingly what was supposed to be tabular data to begin with
- compliance with accessibility laws
- higher time to upgrade a site based on table layout; a real nightmare
in some cases (e.g.:
http://www.yahoo.com)
CSS although supposedly *the* way to do it now, causes many problems for
many people designing websites and also has some browser problems. Just
look at the number of "CSS problem" posts on the HTML newsgroups to see
what I mean.
Everything you mentioned in these 2 sentences is general, abstract,
absolute, without any specifics, tangibles, without any detail, without
any relativity, with undistinguishable generalities, with nothing
concrete. No names, no urls, no code, no stats, no study, no newsgroup
name, no poster name, no subject line, no number mentioned, etc.
Your post never even put under the slightest doubt that most people
designing websites are not professionals to begin with, most people
designing websites never received a training of any kind to do so, most
people do not have (or never have read) a single book on web design,
HTML, CSS, DOM, javascript. IMO, 95%+ of all people designing websites
use WYSIWYG popular and free editors, copy and paste code from
copy-N-paste sites and assume everything is perfect. W3C assumes that
99% of all sites out there would fail markup validation. All this could
explain why so many people asks so many questions and have so many
problems. In this very newsgroup, I would say that 90% of all questions
or problem mentioned are related to the poster's code and not to a
specific bug in a defined browser.
"Although apparently suited to layout on the surface, under the hood it
becomes clear that tables do a pretty lousy job of page construction.
Among their shortcomings is the implied bias of the code towards
presentation rather than structure, the necessity to nest tables in
order to achieve the most basic of layouts, and enough redundant
bandwidth-hogging tags to feed a large family of tag eating monsters for
literally a month."
Tableless layout with Dreamweaver by Drew McClellan
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx/dreamweaver/articles/tableless_layout.html
I iframes are not difficult. Just use the mark-up I've used on the page
below and alter it to suit your needs.
Are you actually inviting people to copy your code and then paste your
code into their page without understanding it? without even
investigating their webpage requirements, needs, usability analysis to
begin with? without assessing the webpage design issues for starters?
Just play with the mark-up till you
get used to how it can place the iframe, alter its size and to enable
scroll bars or not.
http://www.myby.myby.co.uk/image/
You can use a knife to unscrew a screw, you know. A knife is easy to
use, it's reliable, and it will work with almost any screw.
You can use a screwdriver to cut your steak or cut yourself a slice of
pizza, you know. A screwdriver is easy to use, it's reliable, solid, and
it will work with any kind of meat and any kind of pizza size.
DU