At 2:34 PM -0400 5/15/09, Robert Cummings wrote:
It is my opinion that browsers do not yet provided the necessary
functionality across a large enough user spectrum to facilitate the
versatility of layouts used by many sites today. That said, I place most
of the blame squarely on Microsoft.
I saw your post and wanted to comment, but there are several reasons
why I didn't. Some of them are:
1. I agree that the table issue is not yet resolved. I agree that M$
is the biggest problem that all technologies of the day have to
overcome. First you have to solve the problem for the dumbest people
on the planet and then you have to solve it so that M$ products will
continue to work -- it's one of those dumber-dumbest things.
With regard to css, I oscillate between being a "css purist" to a
On one hand I completely agree with the purist that tables in the
past have been abused and the disabled have been hurt by it -- that's
more than ample foundation in my book for the purist position.
On the other hand, there are the reasons you cite where tables have
not been universally accepted and defined by different browser
developers (M$ specifically). As such, the practicality of the css
purist to provide an alternate solution for all problems goes without
foundation. In other words, some things cannot be done without using
tables -- or at least not easily done. My statement is not a
challenge for some "css smart ass" to say "Oh really, just show me"
-- because I don't want to get into that debate!
However, I cite things like a calendar, and your MUD site, and other
such solutions that would be very difficult to accomplish using pure
So as a stop-gap, I often revert back to the main reason why tables
are a "no-no" in the first place, which almost totally revolves
around the disabled. I figure if the disabled have no problems with
me using a table for certain things, then the css purist (my alter
ego) can go piss up a rope.
2. Debating an issue with you, is like arguing with God -- I seldom
want to do it because I usually have my ass handed back to me.
However, I usually learn something in the process -- so, it's a
3. My quota for learning stuff this week has been met and thus I am
reluctant to post a comment as to your use of tables. I hope you
understand (as tedd runs to empty his head for the onslaught of
"things to consider" this way comes).
PS: Apologies in advance for any grammatical errors -- I am writing
in "stream of thought".
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php