Standars and compatibility

**Hierophant** · Jul 10, 2002, 04:59

As vBulletin 3.0 will be XHTML 1.0 Transitional Compliant with the ultimate goal to comply to XHTML 1.0 Strict, I hope to move this site to XHTML/CSS shortly there after. Already working on the means to do so...

**platinum** · Jul 10, 2002, 05:11

Hmmm.. sounds pretty spiffy

**iTec** · Jul 10, 2002, 05:20

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.

I think te key thing here is that once css matures, say css3/4 then there wont be a need to use tables, and if you have played with css based layouts at the moment then you have seen the advantages that allready exist. You would basically be doing yourself in by continuing to use them and that in it self is really enough punishment.

**Adam P.** · Jul 10, 2002, 07:37

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.

**Hierophant** · Jul 10, 2002, 08:14

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.

**Skunk** · Jul 10, 2002, 08:31

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.

**Mark T.** · Jul 10, 2002, 11:12

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 have been playing around with the code for that website, and you would need either tables nested three deep or a combo of tables and div's positioned with CSS. Both can be done, and I'd be happy to lend a hand if you need one

.

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

.

**iTec** · Jul 10, 2002, 23:14

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.

The new pirated sites layout is static, attractive and 100% table free!

**Michel V** · Jul 11, 2002, 08:57

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.

IMHO & from my experience, CSS works even better with fixed layouts

**Adam P.** · Jul 11, 2002, 09:02

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.

**ahtram** · Jul 23, 2002, 16:32

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 Retallick

**iTec** · Jul 24, 2002, 02:38

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."

ahh but that is when you should say adios tables. Learn by doing is one of the most effective ways of learning something and when you are trying to convert a site from tables to css you become addicted to it and will endeavour to absorb as much as you can, and you will see ways in wich css can benefit other areas of your site.

**Joel** · Jul 24, 2002, 04:18

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.

**Ian Glass** · Jul 24, 2002, 04:19

Originally posted by iTec
ahh but that is when you should say adios tables.

You learn well grasshopper... :-D

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.

User Tag List

Thread: Standars and compatibility

Thread Tools

Display

To Table or Not To Table...

Re: To Table or Not To Table...

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions