Design Position by tables or CSS: Problem

  • Thread starter news.frontiernet.net
  • Start date
N

news.frontiernet.net

I have been usingtables to control screen position of content. It is easy to
concieve the design. It is easy to code. It is easy to troubleshoot. It is
easy to tweek code in a trial-and-error mode to find the most advantageous
presentation. There are facilities to help craft advanced layouts with
tables, such as FrontPage.

NOw, it is recommended that one NOT use tables for design control, but us
CSS positioning instead.

U . . huh . .. sure.

How?

A simple task like a header, then a two column presentation, follewed by a
footer, which is easy, quick and cross-browser using tables was a task that
after hours of reading and hours of attempting various codings, I gave up
on..

And all I attempted was the simple part, the two column presentation
followed by the footer. I didnt try to do the header which is tables
handling the javascript navigation.

How can anyone expect that a wide variety of people will ever be able to use
the CSS positioning if it is this obscure, this difficult, this prone to
cross-browser failure?

The quick and dirty example of this using TABLEs is at:
http://www.wgtn.net/Recreation/archery_tbl.htm

The version I was trying with CSS positioning and the <DIV> tag is at:
http://www.wgtn.net/Recreation/archery_div.htm

The CSS version has the footer, which shouldbe at the bottom of the page
following the two column presentation, but it iserroneously positioned ABOVE
it. And the page wont scroll for the visitor to see all of what is in the
left column. Jeez!

The CSS version has an outer container for the two columns using <Div
style="position: relative; top: 100px;">

On the CSS version, the left of the two columns is <Div class="leftpanel"
style="position: absolute; left: 10; width:200; overflow: auto;
border-style: double; background-color: ivory">

On the CSS version, the right of the two columns is <Div
style="position:absolute; left: 240; width:575;">

On the CSS version, the footer is <div style="position: absolute;">

Perhaps it is the nomenclature . . ie the wording that confuses me with
ABSOLUTE that is seemingly not absolute in a design sense and RELATIVE that
seems to indicate it positions with the flow, but apparently does not under
some, and obscure, circumstances.

Is there some simple thing I am missing here? OR are TABLES still the
easiest to implement, most sure footed, quickest to impliment, easiest to do
trial-and-error layout work with, most cross-browser, more easy to trouble
shoot and therefore should still be the design coding of preference?
 
B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

news.frontiernet.net pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:
I have been usingtables to control screen position of content. It is easy to
concieve the design. It is easy to code. It is easy to troubleshoot. It is
easy to tweek code in a trial-and-error mode to find the most advantageous
presentation. There are facilities to help craft advanced layouts with
tables, such as FrontPage.

NOw, it is recommended that one NOT use tables for design control, but us
CSS positioning instead.

U . . huh . .. sure.

It is just a different mindset. Once you are used to it, it becomes very
easy.
How?

A simple task like a header, then a two column presentation, follewed by a
footer, which is easy, quick and cross-browser using tables was a task that
after hours of reading and hours of attempting various codings, I gave up
on..

Perhaps you could examine this simple template I made for a friend.
http://home.rochester.rr.com/bshagnasty/twocolumn.html
Feel free to snatch it. There's a link to the CSS on the page. With a bit
of tweaking, it should do nicely for your site. Notice, too, how it floats
no matter what your browser window size is, or your font size.
And all I attempted was the simple part, the two column presentation
followed by the footer. I didnt try to do the header which is tables
handling the javascript navigation.

Oh dear™. What will the 10-20% of visitors do who have JavaScript
unavailable or turned off?
How can anyone expect that a wide variety of people will ever be able to use
the CSS positioning if it is this obscure, this difficult, this prone to
cross-browser failure?

Take a look at the source of the page above. There is nothing obscure
about it, really. Works in just about any modern browser you might choose,
including text browsers.
The quick and dirty example of this using TABLEs is at:
http://www.wgtn.net/Recreation/archery_tbl.htm

The version I was trying with CSS positioning and the <DIV> tag is at:
http://www.wgtn.net/Recreation/archery_div.htm

Is there some simple thing I am missing here? OR are TABLES still the
easiest to implement, most sure footed, quickest to impliment, easiest to do
trial-and-error layout work with, most cross-browser, more easy to trouble
shoot and therefore should still be the design coding of preference?

IMO, there is a lot more maintenance necessary for sites like yours and
mine if tables are used. A lot more coding...
 
D

Davmagic .Com

From: (e-mail address removed)
(news.frontiernet.net)
I have been usingtables to control screen
position of content. It is easy to concieve
the design. It is easy to code. It is easy to
troubleshoot. It is easy to tweek code in a
trial-and-error mode to find the most
advantageous presentation.
Is there some simple thing I am missing
here? OR are TABLES still the easiest to
implement, most sure footed, quickest to
impliment, easiest to do trial-and-error
layout work with, most cross-browser,
more easy to trouble shoot and therefore
should still be the design coding of
preference?

Stick with tables, if you want cross-browser compatability... browsers
are definately not ready for CSS...

Web Design-Magic-Painting-Junking-Games
INFO 2000 For You
http://www.davmagic.com
See how your webpages look on a MSN-TV Browser:
Download it here: http://developer.msntv.com/Tools/msntvvwr.asp
 
S

Sid Ismail

: A simple task like a header, then a two column presentation, follewed by a
: footer, which is easy, quick and cross-browser using tables


Stick to it then. I do, and use CSS only when I have to...

Sid
 
D

Davmagic .Com

From: (e-mail address removed)
(Beauregard T. Shagnasty)
Perhaps you could examine this simple
template I made for a friend.
http://home.rochester.rr.com/bshagnasty/
wocolumn.html

Just another example of hipprocracy... the <center> text is something
you (in another news group) exclaimed to be bad for readability!!! And
now I find you are using it here... what a joke!

Web Design-Magic-Painting-Junking-Games
INFO 2000 For You
http://www.davmagic.com
See how your webpages look on a MSN-TV Browser:
Download it here: http://developer.msntv.com/Tools/msntvvwr.asp
 
D

David Dorward

Just another example of hipprocracy... the <center> text is something
you (in another news group) exclaimed to be bad for readability!!! And
now I find you are using it here... what a joke!

I see two sections of centred text on that page. Neither are (IMO)
paragraphs (although one is marked up as such).
 
D

Davmagic .Com

Reposted for correction:
From: (e-mail address removed)
(Beauregard T. Shagnasty)
Perhaps you could examine this simple
template I made for a friend.
http://home.rochester.rr.com/bshagnasty/t
wocolumn.html

Just another example of hipprocracy... the <center> text is something
you (in another news group) exclaimed to be bad for readability!!! And
now I find you are using it here... what a joke!

Here's the referenced page (it got cut short in copy in my previous
post):

http://home.rochester.rr.com/bshagnasty/twocolumn.html

Web Design-Magic-Painting-Junking-Games
INFO 2000 For You
http://www.davmagic.com
See how your webpages look on a MSN-TV Browser:
Download it here: http://developer.msntv.com/Tools/msntvvwr.asp
 
B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

Davmagic .Com pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:
Just another example of hipprocracy... the <center> text is something
you (in another news group) exclaimed to be bad for readability!!! And
now I find you are using it here... what a joke!

It must be your broken browser.

The only centered text in that template is the heading, the footer, and
the caption under the photo, where centering would be appropriate.

There is no centering for any of the content. Oh, maybe in your browser.
I'm sorry it doesn't render correctly for you and your two friends.
 
N

Nick Theodorakis

Some browsers are not ready for CSS...


Yes, that's the one. Pity its broken really. How many people use it again?
Three?

Probably fewer than people who use browsers that linearize tables.

Nick
 
D

DU

Davmagic said:
Stick with tables, if you want cross-browser compatability... browsers
are definately not ready for CSS...

Absolute non-sense. 96% of all browsers in use out there on the web have
very good support for the CSS1 properties (which TR was released by the
W3C in 1996). Even browsers in use in 3rd world countries are pretty
good CSS1 compliant and render pages coded for them which uses CSS1.

Only about 4% have a bad support for CSS1.

DU
--
Javascript and Browser bugs:
http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/
- Resources, help and tips for Netscape 7.x users and Composer
- Interactive demos on Popup windows, music (audio/midi) in Netscape 7.x
http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/Netscape7/Netscape7Section.html
 
D

DU

Davmagic .Com wrote:

Stick with tables, if you want cross-browser compatability... browsers
are definately not ready for CSS...

Total non-sense on your part. Here's what an independent testing
summarized publicly just 24 hours ago reported on 9 different browsers
tested on layout and CSS positioning:

8 browsers achieved 95% or better; only ICab got 51%.

MSIE 6 for Windows...100%
MSIE 5.2.3 for Mac....97%
Mozilla 1.4..........100%
Opera 7.20............96%
Camino 0.7...........100%
Firebird 0.6.1........98%
Safari 1.0............96%
Omniweb 4.5...........95%
ICab 2.9.5............51%

CSS Tableless Web Sites will only list layout that are fully compliant
(markup syntax and CSS code) and which will work in recent browsers:
http://www.meryl.net/css/

DU
--
Javascript and Browser bugs:
http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/
- Resources, help and tips for Netscape 7.x users and Composer
- Interactive demos on Popup windows, music (audio/midi) in Netscape 7.x
http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/Netscape7/Netscape7Section.html
 
T

Toby A Inkster

DU said:
MSIE 6 for Windows...100%
MSIE 5.2.3 for Mac....97%
Mozilla 1.4..........100%
Opera 7.20............96%

I seem to remember seeing this survey somewhere too. Seemed a little iffy
to me though:

h1 { counter-reset: ca 0; }
h2:before {
counter-increment: ca;
counter-reset: cb 0;
content: "Chapter " counter(ca) ": ";
}
h3:before {
counter-increment: cb;
content: "Section " counter(ca) "." counter(cb) ": ";
}

Opera 6 ................ 100%
Opera 7 ................ 100%
Internet Explorer ...... 0%
Mozilla ................ 0%
 

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
473,743
Messages
2,569,478
Members
44,898
Latest member
BlairH7607

Latest Threads

Top