This discussion brings forward some of my own confusions regarding CSS and tables. I have had to redesign sites both ways and it's been my experience that CSS with nested divs and classes is much more difficult/expensive/time consuming than redesigning sites that use a table structure for basic layout. There are some tools to help trace what's descendent from what, but it's still a heck of lot of puzzlement time trying to find which combination of tag/div/class from which style sheets have been hacked for which browsers to affect a particular block of content. Then trying to change that style only to find that it blows up a different hierarchical descendent on another page.
Plus I've seen a lot more sites break that are dependant on CSS for positioning when new browser versions are released. How do you justify going back to a client to redesign a site that is breaking because it used CSS targeted for X versions of browser when a new browser version is released? I've been very happy that CSS removed the need to have font declarations littered through the code and being able to change colors etc from one shared CSS resource, but I'm still not convinced of the practical usefulness of it for positioning. Christie Mason ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
