without getting into a pi$$ing contest but.. > I'm not sure 'neglected' is the right word here. XHTML includes a > tables module, this is true. It also specifies that the tables module > provides elements for marking up tabular data (see eg. > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xhtml2-20040722/mod-tables.html). So no, > you are definitely not breaking the rules by including a table in your > document. By using that table for the layout of non-tabular data you > most certainly are not complying with (at least) the spirit of the XHTML > specification.
Well yes and no, lets take a step back and accept that if were were going to use the DIV approach vs TABLE in regards to CSS Properties your code would go from this: <table> <tr> <td>data1</td> </tr> </table> to <div id="semanticallycorrect_wrapper_identification" class="tbl"> <div class="row"> <div class="cell"> </div> </div> -OR- <employees> <employee> <name>data1</name> </employee> </employees> The spirit of XHTML for me was to basically bring chaos to order in terms of marking up HTML to something that is "semantically" correct in its approach. Making machines understand a language instead of taking queus from visual meanings (ie <b> vs <strong> debates etc). > It's not Ford vs. Holden, it's Ford vs. Boeing. Which one provides the > vehicle appropriate for the task at hand? I fail to see that analogy ;) hehe. -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com http://www.flexcoder.com (Coming Soon) --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
