On Dec 15, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Terrence Wood wrote:
How can you be stuck without a choice? Would you not at least alert
them
(clients or peers) to the fact that a better solution may exist?
All good points sir.
What I took from your original post was this (maybe I was just off
base altogether):
A clients wants a design. And you want developers, etc. to tell
clients 'no, you shouldn't do that because the only way to achieve
that design is to use tables, and tables are "bad" so how about you
go with a similar design but without a, b, and c".
My point was that a client isn't going to care how the design is
achieved. Sure, we can tell them why table-less is better. We can
talk all about standards. But if that certain thing he/she likes
about the design is gonna go away because you don't want to use
tables, then the client might just go somewhere where he/she can get
the desired design.
You are correct however, in that a design welded together with table
soup shouldn't be presented in the first place. But I was talking
about _not_ having a choice - other than the choice of making money
or you yourself looking for a different project. We do exactly what
you talk about here. We try very hard to head off non-standard-based
page design. We internally steer designs to table-less, standards
based sites. We attempt to build everything w/o tables, but sometimes
it just doesn't make sense (but that's a different thread ;-) ).
I agree with everything you said, but speaking in broad terms, if a
design needed tables and w/o them the client would receive something
they don't want, then I'd use tables.
I'll match your 10ยข, but it's my last dime...
-----
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
www.mlinc.com
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
