W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: CSS versus tables

From: Slaydon, Eugenia <ESlaydon@beacontec.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:43:44 -0500
Message-ID: <D47827B1DE559D458AB76C6E6EADFC669CCE59@tortugas.beacontec.com>
To: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>, Scott Luebking <phoenixl@sonic.net>
Cc: andrew.mcfarland@unite.net, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Just curious. If you use a layout software, how does all the junk code
behind the scenes affect readers/browsers? I code everything by hand because
I detest the code that most HTML generators create.

Eugenia

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 6:01 PM
To: Scott Luebking
Cc: andrew.mcfarland@unite.net; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: CSS versus tables


Well, it wuld be worth trying to get some real results from a serious sample
of developers.

Anyway, it is true for almost any rectilinear result I have ever tried to
achieve that I find CSS is easier and faster to code than tables. (As I have
said, fewer and fewer people do these by hand anyway, they use a simple
piece
of layout software, so the question doesn't really seem so important)

Cheers

Charles

On Tue, 1 Jan 2002, Scott Luebking wrote:

  Hi,

  Just wondering  -  is this true for most rectilinear layouts of
  cells or does it refer to certain types of layout, e.g. the common
  format of a main area bordered by smaller areas above, below, etc?
  I think for this common type of layout CSS is easier (ignoring
  the browser problems).  If the layout gets more complex and information
  needs to have certain related alignments to other information for visual
  appeal, tables can be pretty fast.

  Scott
Received on Tuesday, 1 January 2002 20:41:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:18 GMT