Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
James Jeffery wrote:
It does: http://www.matthew-boulton.ac.uk/
The site looks o.k, but as you can see the methods are wrong.
Hah, it's been a while since I've seen the following
<table summary="This table is used for layout purposes. It contains the
main content" ...>
It's on par with <img alt="This is just a spacer image. It helps display
the layout in a certain way" ...>
At least there's some attempt at CSS layout on that site, though...could
be a good starting point for discussion.
P
It's not all that bad really. Yes, it uses some 1995 techniques and it
could do with bringing up t date, BUT, make sure that the author isn't
supporting Netscape 4 (or similar) for some reason. If he/she is doing
that, a wonderful modern compliant site won't work - at least not in the
visual/layout sense. I was horrified to discover recently that one of
the sites I support had 335 visitors who used NS4 - in the last year!
335 is a small percentage, but it means 335 disatisfied visitors, and
it's making me wonder whether a <strong>simple</strong> table would be
better . . .
--
Bob
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
