> Thanks, Eric. It was just so nice when I had stripped away a ton of code > and had all these cells with no classes assigned or inline styling or > anything (literally just: <td>X</td>, whereas the old version that > somebody else coded looked like <td align="center" valign="middle" > bgcolor="E1E4E4"><span class="x">X</span></td>) and it worked, and worked > beautifully, but only in IE. I'm tempted to keep my coding how it is now > because they told me when I started here the usual thing: "As long as it > works in IE . . . " > > Christian >
No need to be defeatist :-) I think the relevant point is that all the crufty bits in the example you give (align attributes, extra spans, and so on) were muddying the markup with stuff that was there purely for presentation, which is what you're trying to get away from; whereas Eric's suggestion: > <table> > <tr> > <td class="city">New York</td> > <td class="amnt">$6,123</td> > </tr> <snipped for brevity /> is, if anything, _adding_ semantic information to the markup, which is as it should be. As Albert Einstein said in his early career as a web developer, "Markup should be as simple as possible, but no simpler." The extra classes have relevant names, so you shouldn't feel that they are obstructing your quest for purity. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
