Results 1 to 8 of 8
Aug 30, 2004, 14:32 #1
- Join Date
- Jul 2004
- Quinlan Texas
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
Comparision on work load with CSS
I just finished a site for an organization. Since this organization is "high profile", I took the CSS route (tableless layout) along with using XHTML strict (normally use transitional) and Accessability compliant.
I had no issues at all working with the strict or accessability part. My added coding time was minimum, than had I not used the guildlines for strict and accessability compliance.
When it came to CSS, my total time involved more that doubled. Almost tripled to be exact. I have used CSS in many different situations but never for a pure layout design.
I have learned much but trying to get the layout to work with the different browsers in different OS environments literaly had me banging my head on the desk a few times and drinking vast quantities of coffee.
My question is this.. Are professional designers actually going the CSS layout route as compared to using tables for layout? (I know tables were not designed for layout purposes). When I finally got the site to show correctly in linux, mac, and windows, with the different browsers available, my css code seems almost no better (hacks for browser compatibility) than if I was to use tables for a layout.
Any comments, suggestions or information would be appreciated. I am all for CSS but wonder if it is just me that is having such a hard time getting CSS layout to work cross platform / browser compatible or are for time reasons, professionals still using tables.
Thanks in advance everyone.