SitePoint Sponsor |
|
User Tag List
Results 26 to 39 of 39
Thread: Standars and compatibility
-
Jul 10, 2002, 05:59 #26
-
Jul 10, 2002, 06:11 #27
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Location
- Adelaide, Australia
- Posts
- 6,441
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Hmmm.. sounds pretty spiffy
-
Jul 10, 2002, 06:20 #28
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
- Posts
- 2,243
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally posted by pony
What I mean is, in a future specification of XHTML how would you/could you enforce the correct use of tables within that spec.
-
Jul 10, 2002, 08:37 #29
- Join Date
- Apr 2001
- Location
- San Francisco
- Posts
- 3,288
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
I recently started a thread (http://www.sitepointforums.com/showt...threadid=67421) asking what I should do when coding a new site of mind. Like Mark, this a BIG project so I want to do it right. For the last couple days I've been leaning back and forth.
If I go with tables, I'll know what I'm doing and therefore get it done faster. But if I go with CSS, I'll probably be learning a very valuable skill that will be necessary to know in the future.
The only drawbacks that I've had with CSS layout is that all of the CSS layouts that I've seen have been quite boring. They're nice and organized, but usually just plain columns with solid backgrounds. ALA is a nice site, but a layout like that would never work for something like sitepoint.com. I saw the article where someone changed a SitePoint page into CSS layout and to be frank, the liquid layout looked quite bad. Which brings me to...
the other drawback seems to be that CSS only works good with liquid layouts. I want to use a static layout on the site that I'm working on. Even if I did try to make a liquid layout, I never understand what percentages to use.SPF Mentor/Advisor 2001-2003
SPF Designer of the Year 2002
SPF Graphic Designer of the Year 2003
AdamPolselli.com
-
Jul 10, 2002, 09:14 #30
- Join Date
- Aug 1999
- Location
- Lancaster, Ca. USA
- Posts
- 12,305
- Mentioned
- 1 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
A CSS-driven version of SitePoint: http://sitepoint.com/cssdesign/index.php
This was discussed in th "HTML Utopia" series that was recently highlighted in the Design Theme Week on WebmasterBase.com.
The second article - HTML Utopia: 2 deals with both liquid and absolutely positioned layouts as well.
-
Jul 10, 2002, 09:31 #31
- Join Date
- Jan 2001
- Location
- Lawrence, Kansas
- Posts
- 2,066
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
swimm - I recommend trying both. If it's a really important project it may not be ideal for your first forray in to a new technology, but it's an ideal opportunity for you to learn about CSS positioning. Spend a day or two playing around with CSS, and if you aren't confident you can do the whole project in it by then use a table or two combined with some of the CSS knowledge you've picked up.
-
Jul 10, 2002, 12:12 #32
- Join Date
- Jul 2001
- Location
- The Netherlands
- Posts
- 2,617
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally posted by swimm5001
I recently started a thread (http://www.sitepointforums.com/showt...threadid=67421) asking what I should do when coding a new site of mind. Like Mark, this a BIG project so I want to do it right. For the last couple days I've been leaning back and forth.
If I go with tables, I'll know what I'm doing and therefore get it done faster. But if I go with CSS, I'll probably be learning a very valuable skill that will be necessary to know in the future.
The only drawbacks that I've had with CSS layout is that all of the CSS layouts that I've seen have been quite boring. They're nice and organized, but usually just plain columns with solid backgrounds. ALA is a nice site, but a layout like that would never work for something like sitepoint.com. I saw the article where someone changed a SitePoint page into CSS layout and to be frank, the liquid layout looked quite bad. Which brings me to...
the other drawback seems to be that CSS only works good with liquid layouts. I want to use a static layout on the site that I'm working on. Even if I did try to make a liquid layout, I never understand what percentages to use..
I am looking forward to seeing the forums and the main SitePoint website standards compliant.
I have decided to go ahead an try everything with div's. I worked on a few projects with them before, and I have a fairly good understanding on how to position them. With that decision came the decision to drop NS4 support, I am going for Opera 5.0 and up, IE 5.0 and up and NS 6.0 and up as mentioned before. I am curious as to how this will work out.
-
Jul 11, 2002, 00:14 #33
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
- Posts
- 2,243
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally posted by swimm5001
the other drawback seems to be that CSS only works good with liquid layouts. I want to use a static layout on the site that I'm working on.
-
Jul 11, 2002, 09:57 #34
- Join Date
- Sep 2000
- Location
- Corsica
- Posts
- 552
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally posted by swimm5001
the other drawback seems to be that CSS only works good with liquid layouts. I want to use a static layout on the site that I'm working on.
-
Jul 11, 2002, 10:02 #35
- Join Date
- Apr 2001
- Location
- San Francisco
- Posts
- 3,288
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Thanks iTec and ShinMa - great to hear!
I'm definitely thinking about going with all CSS. I think I would benefit in the future. Unfortunately it's going to set back my project, but that's alright. I want to do everything right.
SPF Mentor/Advisor 2001-2003
SPF Designer of the Year 2002
SPF Graphic Designer of the Year 2003
AdamPolselli.com
-
Jul 23, 2002, 17:32 #36
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Posts
- 52
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
To Table or Not To Table...
True Confession: I'm still using tables. Reason? I'm in my rookie season of using CSS, and am still not proficient enough at it to say, "Adios, tables."
Martha RetallickGrow your business with direct mail postcards!
It's easy, affordable, and FUN! Learn how at:
PostcardMarketingSecrets.com
-
Jul 24, 2002, 03:38 #37
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
- Posts
- 2,243
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Re: To Table or Not To Table...
Originally posted by ahtram
True Confession: I'm still using tables. Reason? I'm in my rookie season of using CSS, and am still not proficient enough at it to say, "Adios, tables."
-
Jul 24, 2002, 05:18 #38
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 50
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
CSS is not as limiting as many people believe. The problem is that it's a technology that is very much in its infancy. As it becomes more widely used, the variety of design implementations will also increase.
There's very little you can't do with CSS. It just takes a little independent, creative thinking.
-
Jul 24, 2002, 05:19 #39
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Location
- Beyond yonder
- Posts
- 2,384
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally posted by iTec
ahh but that is when you should say adios tables.
Just remember this one thing: it's not tables that are bad, but they're misuse. For instance, a remake of these very forums shouldn't be completely free of tables, as they're probably the best way of associating a post's content with the author and the authors' info.
I dream of a day, myself, where tools can be not 'bad' or 'good,' but unique unto themselves in accomplishing an ends. :-)
~~Ian
P.S. I tought Nick everything he knows. :-p
P.P.S. The font tag is evil.
Bookmarks