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

RE: more CSS and tables

From: Jim Thatcher <jimthatcher@66.70.170.225>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 16:21:32 -0600
To: "Vadim Plessky" <lucy-ples@mtu-net.ru>, "WAI-IG" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBKJDAKKEJDCICIODLEENJDMAA.jimthatcher@66.70.170.225>
Hi Vadim,

You referred to www.news.com as an example making your point. Then this is
not the point about CSS for layout, right??  www.news.com is a frame site
whose main frame is http://news.cnet.com. That page seems to me to use
tables for layout in a somewhat typical way. Just for clarification, what
does www.news.com illustrate?

Jim
jim@jimthatcher.com
Accessibility Consulting
http://jimthatcher.com
512-306-0931

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Vadim Plessky
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 6:46 PM
To: Joe Clark; WAI-IG
Subject: Re: more CSS and tables


On Saturday 05 January 2002 20:19, Joe Clark wrote:
[...]
|   I'm all for CSS layouts. I'm also all for table layouts. I use both,
|   actually. Someday, when I really figure out how to use CSS layouts
|   and all the browser bugs are worked out (all-stylesheet layouts are

What browser bugs are you speaking about?
replacement of <font> with <span> is already great by itself, and things
like
this work fine even in old NN 4.7
Many CSS rules work fine in MS IE 5.0, which is so far is de-facto standard
on the web (around 80% of all visitors)

Good example of high-traffic site which exactly did transition like this is
www.news.com (C-Net news)
They changed from <font> to <span>/<div> and CSS around one year ago
(beginning of 2001), and rsulting page size decreased from around 60K to
22K-25K.
I have both types of their pages saved on disk, and can send to people
interested in those changes by mail off-list.


|   ten times harder to get right cross-platform than tables), I'll
|   convert en masse. We have not reached that day, and nagging at people
|   to stop using tables for layout when CSS is so very difficult and
|   buggy *and* when real-world adaptive technology handles tables just
|   fine simply is not getting us anywhere.

as soon as other browsers (Mozilla, in particular) support display:
inline-block CSS property, I see no real reason to use tables for layouts.
You can do inline layouting of blocks using ... 'inline-block' property
 At a moment, { display: inline-block } is supported by MS IE6 and MacIE 5.x

other IMPORTANT NOTE:
 * * * * * *
there is no warranty that TABLEs will be supported by future (X)HTML
sepcifications. And Tables module is *optional* in CSS3 - it is *not
required*. Therefor, you can face browser in the future, which is fully
standard compliant and can't layout tables at all - as ... it doesn't need
it!
 * * * * * *

|
|   I am perfectly aware, by the way, of the vast repositories of
|   ready-made CSS designs available out there, like
|   <http://glish.com/css/> and the list at
|   <http://www.zeldman.com/exit.html>. I have a hard time getting those
|   to work, either.

Check www.css.nu
They have nice examples how to work-around existing bugs.
--

Vadim Plessky
http://kde2.newmail.ru  (English)
33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE
http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html
KDE mini-Themes
http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/
Received on Sunday, 6 January 2002 17:24:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:59 GMT