Steve,

And yes people abuse DL's i wont disagree with you, i neither use them or
would use them, i feel DLs are as bad as tables because they are not
semantically correct, but what i was saying is over Tables and a DL it would
have to be a DL. Its best to use:

<form method="post" action="update.php">
<fieldset>
<legend>Login Details</legend>
<div><label>First Name:</label><input type="text" id="username"
name="username"></div>
<div><label>Password:</label><input type="password" id="password"
name="password"></div>
<button name="submit" value="submit" type="submit">
</fieldset>
</form>

And then style it with CSS. If styled correctly you can achive anything.

And just to clarify, just as a DL is not semantic, neither is a table, and a
table is not the answer.

On 5/22/07, Steve Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 No, a form is not a list of form controls any more than a chapter of a
book is a list of paragraphs or a paragraph is a list of words. A collection
of form controls is a fieldset.

Definition lists are the new tables. People are just falling over
themselves trying to abuse them in all kinds of inappropriate ways. To
paraphrase the previous message, a definition list is for lists of
definitions, and if you're using it to style your page you need to take a
strong look at what you're doing.

Steve

 ------------------------------
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On
Behalf Of *Jamie Collins
*Sent:* 22 May 2007 18:10
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

A table is for Tabular Date, a quote from the W3C Documentation:

"Tables should not be used purely as a means to layout document content as
this may present problems when rendering to non-visual media. Additionally,
when used with graphics, these tables may force users to scroll
horizontally to view a table designed on a system with a larger display.
To minimize these problems, authors should use style 
sheets<http://../present/styles.html>to control layout rather than
tables."

There is a big debate around a DL, but in a sense a list of form inputs is
infact just that, A LIST. So while you may be saying its wrong its more
semantic then using a table.

People need to understand that they cannot just return to tables because
they dont know how to layout there forms or any other elements for that
matter. A table is for tabular data, and if your using it to style your page
you need to take a strong look at what your doing. Tables for layout,
regardless of what your laying out is wrong.

On 5/22/07, Steve Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  I don't see how using a table is any worse than using a definition
> list. Both are wrong. Any spurious argument you use to justify a definition
> list can equally apply to a table. CSS can usually achieve anything you want
> visually.
>
> Steve
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *On Behalf Of *Jamie Collins
> *Sent:* 22 May 2007 08:46
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout
>
>  Kane, exactly what i was going to say.
>
> And in no way, and i mean by no way should you use tables for forms,
> unless its ment
> for tabular date, the only way i can ever see this being possible is if
> you were to create
> a spreadsheet that allows the user to input details. Thats the only real
> use i can
> see for putting a form in a table.
>
> Go with the DL method or the DIV method.
>
> On 5/22/07, Kane Tapping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > My view:
> >
> >    1. Use HTML for content
> >    2. Use CSS for presentation
> >    3. Use tables only for tabular data
> >
> >
> > WCAG 1.0 has the following guidelines applicable to this question.
> >
> > 3.3 Use style sheets to control layout and presentation.
> > 5.1 For data tables, identify row and column headers.
> > 5.3 Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when
> > linearized. Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an
> > alternative equivalent (which may be a linearized version).
> > 5.4 If a table is used for layout, do not use any structural markup
> > for the purpose of visual formatting.
> > 5.5 Provide summaries for tables.
> > 10.2 Until user agents support explicit associations between labels
> > and form controls, for all form controls with implicitly associated labels,
> > ensure that the label is properly positioned.
> > 10.3 Until user agents (including assistive technologies) render
> > side-by-side text correctly, provide a linear text alternative (on the
> > current page or some other) for all tables that lay out text in parallel,
> > word-wrapped columns.
> > 10.4 Until user agents handle empty controls correctly, include
> > default, place-holding characters in edit boxes and text areas.
> > 12.4 Associate labels explicitly with their controls.
> >
> >
> >  - Kane
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   *"Benedict Wyss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > 22/05/2007 02:15 PM   Please respond to
> > [email protected]
> >
> >    To
> > [email protected]  cc
> >
> >  Subject
> > [WSG] dl v table for form layout
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am having a discussion with colleagues here at work (won't mention
> > our site as it stinks) about the best way forward for form layouts.
> >
> > I have one person saying he will continue to use tables till otherwise
> > informed.
> >
> > I have another who uses none of the above, which you can imaging is
> > not that good to look at with everything butting up against each other. His
> > other suggestion was to add &nbsp's to move things about.........
> >
> > I like to use the definition list with Labels.
> >
> > Now I know the dl I am using is not being used exactly as it was
> > originally used (good point), but I say it is 100 times better than tables.
> >
> > Can I get a WSG response on the best format to layout a form.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Ben
> >
> > *******************************************************************
> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > *******************************************************************
> >
> > *******************************************************************
> > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > *******************************************************************
> >
> >
>
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *******************************************************************
>
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *******************************************************************
>


*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************

*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************



*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************

Reply via email to