Hi John
I don't want to weigh into this argument of tables right or wrong - I
think all the angles are being covered pretty well at the moment. But
I read your post a couple of things jumped out at me.
On the whole it's a good read I agree with a lot of what you are
saying bit this section:
On Sat, 2004-05-15 at 09:25, John Allsopp wrote:
So rather than seeing something like at times, it may be necessary to
use a non standards based approach to achieve an outcome within
certain constraints, and that is ok they see all those standards
zealots really don't know about the real
Mark,
On the whole it's a good read I agree with a lot of what you are
saying bit this section:
But unfortunately an article like yours is not read by them in the
spirit in which you intended, it is read as a vindication of their
position. See, Andy Budd agrees with me.
So rather than seeing
From: Chris Blown
[...]
One of the things that I find hard to believe in this whole debate is
that tables are some how seen as a non standards based approach.
I see that view a lot from people who just discovered the beauty of CSS,
and are going a bit mad in the fight to kill off tables, even
John Allsopp wrote:
Andy,
Hi John,
I wasn't actually going too respond to your comments but considering
your latest email, I thought it was probably a good idea.
I actually wrote about half a dozen different replies to the article
and posted none of them, other than my snarky comment on your
One of Andy's 10 questions answers reinforced this by the use of words
like fascist (a fascist is a pretty nasty thing BTW) to describe some
people (easily misunderstood as everyone) in the web standards
community who might be overly zealous about whether or not a site
validates. Not that I
Who are all of these mad heavy-handed authoritarian web nuts that you're
talking about? ;)
From what I see there are different ways of putting over a point, each
one usually as legitimate as the other and they all usually contribute
to a stronger understanding of web standards for those new to
The voices are telling me that Patrick Griffiths said on 5/19/2004
7:43 AM:
Who are all of these mad heavy-handed authoritarian web nuts that you're
talking about? ;)
/me fires up Xnews, looks to see that
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.* are still there.
Yup.
/me scratches head.
:-p
--
Rev.
At some stage, but that does look different to what I recall.
Certainly a step in the right direction.
On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 14:22, Mark Stanton wrote:
Hi Chris
Have you tried turning on verbose output? This can be done by going to
the extended interface at
Ryan Christie wrote:
Go to Andy's article, and try replacing the words table and table
layout with font tag.
Works a treat,
Good observation :) I think it works with image map as well
--Ryan Christie
*
The discussion list for
Am 15.05.2004 um 08:52 schrieb Peter A. Shevtsov:
I do not agree about image maps. For example, you have the image of
geographical map, and you have to make so, if you click on the certain
country area, the page with information related to this country would
open. How can you provide this
Am 15.05.2004 um 20:36 schrieb Peter A. Shevtsov:
Michael Zeltner wrote:
but hey, you could do that with accessible flash, that would be
cleaner :)
Hey! You force visitors to install Flash player. But someone can't do
that because their internal company policy, or they just don't know
how to do
Leader/Search Optimisation
PerthWeb Pty Ltd - http://www.perthweb.com.au/
Ph: 08 9226 1366 - Fax: 08 9226 1375
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Aaron DC
Sent: Friday, 14 May 2004 1:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] Tables are bad
Although as I'd already posted today...
http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2004/05/13/gasp_tables/index.php
...has an objective look at it.
How about this article, helpfully titled Why tables for layout is
stupid.
http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/
Also, I highly recommend Jeffrey Zeldman's
El vie, 14-05-2004 a las 08:55, Nick Lo escribió:
Although as I'd already posted today...
http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2004/05/13/gasp_tables/index.php
After the 'there's a place for i and b' and 'there's a place for
layout tables' posts, i feel i should be writing my own 'there's a
]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Tables are bad because...
El vie, 14-05-2004 a las 08:55, Nick Lo escribió:
Although as I'd already posted today...
http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2004/05/13/gasp_tables/index.php
After the 'there's a place for i and b' and 'there's a place for
layout tables' posts, i feel i
Mike et al.
Sorry but there isnt a place for font tags. font has been
deprecated and
sooner or later it'll cease working.
Go to Andy's article, and try replacing the words table and table
layout with font tag.
Works a treat,
Sigh,
John
John Allsopp
:: westciv :: http://www.westciv.com/
Andy,
I actually wrote about half a dozen different replies to the article and posted none of them, other than my snarky comment on your blog, for which I apologize.
I didn't publish them because they were all a little, well, heated.
I usually write, I hope, with a little levity, and wit, if on
... heya all - just joined the list for interest's
sake and am slowly making my way through some of the posted CSS-savvy sites.
Somewhere along the way someone decided tables and in particular nested tables
are a bad thing (tm) - I am curious as to the reasoning/history behind this, and
19 matches
Mail list logo
