Wed designers / programmers / authors - read this!

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


No it's not. Each browser tend to render tables differently, plus rendering complicated tables takes a very long time.

The problem is that you are ASSuming that anyone using tables is automatically using a bunch of nested tables. Not true.

Now we know you are not speaking from experience.

Nope.

You want one page with a bunch of white space and a few easy to read tags?

Or you want a garbled WYSIWYG crap making reference to a bunch of CSS files.

Sorry, tables are still better, faster, and easier to edit.

That 10% of your audience you are alienating by going for the latest and greatest, is 10% too much.

[Asher]

Simplicity is elegance and usability.

Minimalism.

[Ted Striker]

word

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
The problem is that you are ASSuming that anyone using tables is automatically using a bunch of nested tables. Not true.

No, I don't assume that. Even simple tables render slower than CSS, however.

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Nope.

You want one page with a bunch of white space and a few easy to read tags?

Or you want a garbled WYSIWYG crap making reference to a bunch of CSS files.

Sorry, tables are still better, faster, and easier to edit.

That 10% of your audience you are alienating by going for the latest and greatest, is 10% too much.

As I said, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Case in point: "one page with a bunch of white spaces and a few easy to read tags" (presumably related to tables mostly) does not translate into "a garbled WYSIWYG crap making reference to a bunch of CSS files." You need only one or two CSS statements for your page.

[Ted Striker]

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard!

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
No, I don't assume that. Even simple tables render slower than CSS, however.

Of course, it's not like CSS is largely useless overhead to begin with.

The problem with CSS is it's more incompatible than HTML. IE's CSS differs from Mozilla's CSS differs from Opera's CSS.

HTML tables are far more standard.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ted Striker


That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard!

I've heard worse, from the same poster though.

[Ted Striker]

if ((is_ie4up && is_mac) || (is_ie4up && is_win) || (is_nav6 && is_mac)){
    sheet = "/includes/css1.css";
    }
else {
    sheet = "/includes/css2.css";
    } 

"Look Mom, I just painted Picasso with these TWO SIMPLE LINES!!!"

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ted Striker


That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard!

Clearly, you fail to counter my argument

[Ted Striker]

spacer.gif is still your friend.

[Asher]

I don't think he needs to.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher


Of course, it's not like CSS is largely useless overhead to begin with.

Stop showing off your ignorance, Glonkie. There's no need to include any CSS statement that you don't need. Where's the overhead?

Originally posted by Asher
The problem with CSS is it's more incompatible than HTML. IE's CSS differs from Mozilla's CSS differs from Opera's CSS.

Just because IE doesn't support standard CSS doesn't mean other browsers don't.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
I don't think he needs to.

Snooze.

Gratuitous use of smilies does not mask your (read: Ted Striker and Glonkie) ignorance in this area.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Just because IE doesn't support standard CSS doesn't mean other browsers don't.

Reality check baby: 95% of web browsers are IE.

So what's the real world standard -- IE or paper standards?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Snooze.

Gratuitous use of smilies does not mask your (read: Ted Striker and Glonkie) ignorance in this area.

You just said CSS renders faster than a simple HTML table -- that more than invalidates everything you ever say on the matter of web development.

CSS is more flexible, usually requires less code, but a downside of this is it does have more processing overhead -- it needs to translate the "less code" into the same thing as the more explicit HTML tables.