31–40 of 52 posts
And of course, remember that it's not necessarily an either/or decision. Sometime part of your page really is a grid, and really should be a table.
I'm so glad I'm not the only one that feels this way. As far as I'm concerned, CSS is a miserable piece of work. Witness how hard it is do a simple three column layout. It fails half of the simple edict: Make easy things easy and hard things possible.
We have decades of experience with real layout models in both traditional graphic design software and in developmental software that has layout manager.
And nobody thought that being able to flow several columns on a webpage would be useful?
I'm so glad I'm not the only one that feels this way. As far as I'm concerned, CSS is a miserable piece of work. Witness how hard it is do a simple three column layout. It fails half of the simple edict: Make easy things easy and hard things possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That sounds kind of snobby, in that it's largely theoretical but just doesn't work in the real world. It's like trying to explain to someone why a good Napa Cabernet is so much better than the $5 Merlot they like. "Well, it was grown from the Carneros region, fermented in French Oak barrels, then cellared for 10 years." "Yeah, but this Carlo Rossi Paisano tastes better." (and I say this as a devoted wine snob.) CSS i…
>>> "You're moving things around drastically." Funnily enough I just altered two sites this week by moving columns around. One was a simple CSS change, the other was one altered margin declaration and one moved div - I also get to see the alterations as they will appear live in a browser (FF). >>> " Every time I find myself typing style="clear:both" I wonder why the hell I'm doing it." Because of IE? >>> "equally har…
See the triumph of KML (which mixes content and presentation) over straight GML (separate content and presentation) in the GIS world for comparison.
Although tables is easier than CSS, most browsers will render CSS almost the same way. But not always true for tables. Especially wider sites that need to shrink to fit a screen. I just weigh amount of work I have to do against how much I'm getting paid and do which ever way I feel comfortable with.
Doesn't your question include its answer? Guilt is not a very productive motivation. I've noticed that once people settle on something as "the" right way, they measure everything against that yardstick. This is so common, I wonder if having a yardstick -- an easy way to answer questions -- is the purpose of settling on "the" right way in the first place. Software people do this a lot because software projects are so…
I'm so glad I'm not the only one that feels this way. As far as I'm concerned, CSS is a miserable piece of work. Witness how hard it is do a simple three column layout. It fails half of the simple edict: Make easy things easy and hard things possible.
Since when is it hard to do a three column layout with CSS? It is in fact quite easy, and always has been. What has been hard is three columns with a liquid center column that works in Internet Explorer without hacks . That's a Microsoft problem, not a CSS problem.
Creating a n-column layout in CSS, in a sane way, has literally turned into a pseudo-science over the years. That wouldn't be the case if it had ever been as simple as spelling it out the obvious way and adding some IE hacks.
Even todays state of the art solution ("the holy grail") is a fairly strange beast. It admittedly gets away without the nasty hacks and negative margins that previous solutions required - but it took us literally years to arrive there and it's still far from pretty.
Not that tables are made to structure the content. It's just easier.