Ok, Rimantas, replicate http://seowebsitepromotion.com without tables and without hacks.
I'd sooner wait for some decent columnar formatting options then, when the time comes, do a search and replace on the tabular structure. Mike Pepper -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rimantas Liubertas Sent: 28 May 2004 13:19 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] ---------- Original Message ------------- From: "Mike Pepper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Be practical with the constraints of our standards. Of course it is >*possible* to build a perfect 3 column layout in CSS exactly as you want >it -- but at what cost in terms of time and complexity. You end up catering >for all browsers by incorporating kludges and fixes which may do the job >legitimately but I reiterate: what's the point? Afert doing table layouts for 8 years and knowing ins and outs of it I can clearly see the point doing that in CSS. It is simply FASTER and more efficient in any possible meaning. >We're all aware the ideal situation is the proper estrangement of form and >content and correct semantic markup. But until we have the tools to perform >these tasks in CSS We have. >and, importantly, the browsers developers incorporate >them, They did. > we should serve the best development we can to our clients and our >audience, and if this means a hybrid design which renders with stability >then we are doing a good job. Does it render with stability ond PDAs and mobiles? In my opinion all this talk is just caused by "old habits die hard" and "oh, CSS is sooo hard to learn". I see dozens of sites every day with absolutely primitive layout (2 columns) built using numbers and high numbers of nested tables. People who built them do not know how to use tables for layout, they use CSS for some formating, but they don't know how to do that properly. And many of them will never learn. Cause everyone can do the web, right? That enormous level of forgiveness browsers show for the bad code helped to rise the web, but killed internal quality. Is it not the right time to bring it back (or actualy to implement it)? And all those "sometimes minimal tables are good for layout" talks - I am sick of them, cause people tend to skip wirst two words. Same goes for "almost valid" code. Either it is valid or not. One cannot be almost pregnant. You cannot compile progam, if source code contains syntax errors. But you can run a website. Too bad. Yes, I know about "real world" and "practical approach". I am not going to have an objective look on this. We had it for too long already. And practical approach can turn out as very unpractical in the long run. End of the rant. Rimantas ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ***************************************************** ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
