Designer wrote:
It seems to me that pragmatism can sometimes outbenefit the religion
of standards - and I'd really like some real world feedback on when
such a table approach causes real problems. (Yes, I know it's not
truly semantic, and I agree that it's a problem because of that).
If web standards is a religion, then I'm out of here :-)
As long as you know - and have gone through - all pros and cons, then it
comes down to "taking the heat" for using that 'HTML table'. No browsers
will ever cause real problems because of it.
The only problem I can see is that one may start feeling so "safe" with
that old 'HTML table' solution that one stop exploring the various "pure
CSS" solutions (with workarounds and all) for a while. Browsers and
standards are improving - albeit slowly, so one may have a bit of
"catching up" to do one day in the future.
Less experienced web designers may also be lead to think that there are
fewer options at hand than there really are, and that won't help on
progress.
I'm pragmatic, and pretty agnostic, when it comes to standards and
"standard-compliant" browsers. I don't think I will fall back to using
'HTML tables' as layout tools though, as I think it is safer to hack
IE/win and other old browsers to pieces in CSS and keep the source-code
relatively free from such hacks, while I'm waiting for standards to work
as intended across the board.
Now, if only I knew the _intentions_ behind the various parts of those
standards, so I knew what to expect ;-)
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
