"Why tables for layout is stupid"

M

Mark Parnell

Sometime around Thu, 30 Oct 2003 23:26:56 GMT, m is reported to have
stated:
They do look good. But I havn't yet been able
to figure out what in the world the two big blocks
of JavaScript in the source of each page are about.
Continuing analysis...........

I didn't even look at the code. For all I know, they could be using tables
for layout! ;-)

I don't know much about Javascript, but that _does_ look strange...
 
M

m

Mark said:
Sometime around Thu, 30 Oct 2003 23:26:56 GMT, m is reported to have
stated:



I didn't even look at the code. For all I know, they could be using tables
for layout! ;-)

I don't know much about Javascript, but that _does_ look strange...
Yeah. I've got it in an editor now, trying to format it in some
vaguely readable way. The answer must come!
 
J

Josh Lee

m said:
They do look good. But I havn't yet been able
to figure out what in the world the two big blocks
of JavaScript in the source of each page are about.
Continuing analysis...........

It encodes their email addresses, to protect against spambots. If you
turn of javascript, then reload the page, their addresses will disappear.
 
M

m

Josh said:
m wrote:




It encodes their email addresses, to protect against spambots. If you
turn of javascript, then reload the page, their addresses will disappear.

Jeez! Seems like they could do it with a little less code.
 
I

informant

Richard said:
90% Bullshit.

Care to expound on that statement, Mr. Bullis?


Path:
sn-us!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsg
uy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews3
From: "Richard" <anom@anom>
Newsgroups: alt.html
Subject: Re: "Why tables for layout is stupid"
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 19:43:07 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p-117.newsdawg.com
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-No-Archive: yes
FL-Build: Fidolook 2002 (SL) 6.0.2600.78 - 24/10/2002 21:18:29
Xref: sn-us alt.html:436301
 
M

Matthew Superstar Swass

Those pages read like propaganda, and some of the statements are just as
truthful.
 
I

Isofarro

m said:
Jeez! Seems like they could do it with a little less code.

Say that when looking at a tables layout from a CSS perspective and no-one
will believe you ;-)
 
M

m

Isofarro said:
m wrote:




Say that when looking at a tables layout from a CSS perspective and no-one
will believe you ;-)

Don't be too easy on them, Iso.
It's time to give these kids some
tough love.

They diet off some bytes by killing deprecated
markup, then pack it right back on by chugging down
two huge javascript malteds.

They're showing all the signs of
compulsive behavior.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to sentence them
to a 12 step program! ;)
 
M

Michael Weber

Hi informant,

[Thu, 30 Oct 2003 21:17:10 -0600/informant]
Care to expound on that statement, Mr. Bullis?

Before talking about evil layout tables, this guy should learn how
to make a website that is fluid. Nobody needs idiots that are
presenting their superduper easy css-styled sites to show the world
how cool they are. Let me guess, why the above website has a fixed
witdh. I dont need to guess - the header tells me: Adobe GoLive.
Deactivate "seybold.css" to emulate a non-css browser and this site
is unreadable crap.


regs
michael
 
M

Michael Weber

[Fri, 31 Oct 2003 05:20:09 GMT/Leif K-Brooks]
Care to explain?

<meta name="generator" content="Adobe GoLive" />

&

Adam Pratt | Adobe Systems Incorporated |

Nothing new. Macromedia also provides wonderful tuts. They look
great in Dreamweaver...
 
T

Toby A Inkster

Michael said:
Before talking about evil layout tables, this guy should learn how
to make a website that is fluid.

In his defense, it seems to be a series of lecture slides that he's just
put on the web, so it would have just been designed for full screen at
whatever resolution the projector did.
 
A

Andy Dingley

Before talking about evil layout tables, this guy should learn how
to make a website that is fluid.

Which guy ? By the looks of the credits, this is a presentation that
was written by one person and had the HTML coded by another. If
you're suggesting their implementation is poor CSS, then might I
assume that you support their basic point - CSS is the way to go.
Nobody needs idiots that are
presenting their superduper easy css-styled sites to show the world
how cool they are.

The message still isn't through yet - we can use more presentations
like this.
Deactivate "seybold.css" to emulate a non-css browser and this site
is unreadable crap.

Maybe, but that's the medium not the message.
 
M

Michael Weber

Hi Andy,

[Sat, 01 Nov 2003 12:35:19 +0000/Andy Dingley]
Which guy ? By the looks of the credits, this is a presentation that
was written by one person and had the HTML coded by another. If
you're suggesting their implementation is poor CSS,

Their using of css for formatting. They say "dont use <br>" and are
unable to keep their text in format without css.

Do you think, it makes sense to define the content-div with
MARGIN-LEFT: 350px;

especially this:
WIDTH: 33em; (em!)

? (33em in this browser IE6 = 1,5 times margin-left. When i set
default font-size to bigger, 33em becomes twice the margin-left = a
window-min.width of 1000+ px. Ahem)

I am at 1280x1024 and have to widen the window up to 65% of the
screen to get rid of the scrollbar. On most pages, 60-80% of the
browser-window is filled with white. A really good way to tell me
"Look at this cute CSS-Layout, much better than layout-tables" *g*
Maybe, but that's the medium not the message.

Sorry, but the message i got, was: You don't need a big empty white colum
below/underneath the image. You wont see this nice big empty white
colum, because you have to scroll horizontally to read the content.


regs
michael
(my english is poor, i know)
 

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