I like Bert :-) He talks sense. And before you say it the other people also
made very good points which I appreciate. A lot of it does seem very
conceptual however, if you know what I mean.
Terence said, "Using them for layout is a bit like making up everything in
<p> tags." Does anyone agree that we are abusing the use of CSS (square
pegs in round holes?) with the way we force it to do things that it perhaps
was not really designed for? Are floats really meant to be used for column
design? If they are then why are there oodles of pages on the net about
getting them to work right. We never had this problem with tables ;-)
I disagree with the point about revisiting the design just because CSS is
not up to the job. The web is a visual medium and we should be able to
design pages to look how we want, with the condition of making sure they are
readable and suitable for those accessing them.
For those of you who use a background image, how do you get round the
problem of the columns changing size? I hope you are not using a fixed width
layout (as many CSS column layouts do)! ;-)
Regarding my point about CSS taking longer. As I say I have been using CSS
for various sites for quite a while, but it's the time taken to find the
right hack for the right problem, making sure you have the best hack
possible, trying to make sure you have all angles covered etc. If anyone
knows of an up to date article detailing the most common CSS design problems
and the best solutions then I would love to know of it!
The whole concept of using tables for layout is flawed for a number of
reasons. It makes assumptions about the type of device being used to
render the page, the abilities of the person viewing it, adds unneccessary
weight to the design, is harder to update, and directly interferes with
the content.
Final point I want to know is, in what way does a table (a simple 1 row 2
column table) actually cause any of the above problems you mention? How does
it hinder someone from viewing it on a different device for example? How is
it harder to update? I am not talking about multiple nested tables.
I remember when Java was the next great thing. How Java applets were just
what we needed. Yet I remember thinking, well where are the real world
examples of how these applets are useful on a web site? The main examples I
knew of were games.
Then there was Flash. Flash has done a bit better but again, people rush to
it and we had to suffer the period of Flash intro pages! Nice to look at ...
once... but ultimately pointless. When you go to a web site you want
information usually, not entertainment. Flash has now found it's right place
as an aid to the visual appeal of web pages, or other uses, but is not so
abused now.
CSS is very different from both Java and Flash, but we need to keep things
real and not go overboard. Why is it we use floats for layout when you could
argue relative positioning is how it should be done? Are we using floats for
the wrong purpose?
Thanks,
Stephen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bert Doorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 5:56 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Expanding height of left column to fill space
G'day again
Once upon a time it was NN4, now it's IE6, and tomorrow who knows? And
that's the point of designing to web standards. As for what the client
wants, I say it's two of: good, fast, cheap.
Yep. And some of those have difficulty with non table based layouts :-)
However, I doubt very much that the big driver is the visual design Bert,
and I doubt most people visiting or commissioning a web site give two
hoots as to how its built.
The vast majority of my clients don't care whether I use a table or divs
(and would not even know the difference). But they do often want a
particular layout and all except a few do look at it with a graphical
browser.
For the record, the people paying my bills *do* want standards based
design - I'm working in e-govt - and they want content that is usable by
people, and *easily* manipulated by machines.
Standards based (good) does not rule out using the occasional table for
layout if it's the quickest way to get something out there (fast and
cheap).
("e-govt" - is that the real world? LOL)
If a 2 column CSS layout with a band of color down one side is difficult
to implement with todays technology, shouldn't we instead look for designs
that work with the technology we are using?
If it's your own site and you are happy to have a different layout, sure.
Or if you can convince the client that your way is better. But if the
client wants a particular look, We should give them what they want. If
that means using a *single* table to get two columns of equal length and
with different background colors, I will use the table.
setting a background on one or two div's *still* uses less code than the
equivalent markup for tables.
Show me an example?* *Take into account not just the html, but also the
css and the file size of any images you might use for the background
color(s).
No, it's not a crime, but really if
your design needs a table in the strucutral layer to support the visual
design, should you not revisit the visual design?
The visual design is not always negotiable, so I use the means available
to me to deliver what I am paid to deliver in the most efficient way I
can. To me that means CSS based layouts *most* of the time.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
