W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > March 2011

Re: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-130: table-layout

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 19:27:38 -0500
Message-ID: <4D7ABDFA.7070204@intertwingly.net>
To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, www-archive@w3.org
On 03/11/2011 05:16 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Sam Ruby<rubys@intertwingly.net>  wrote:
>>   * Compared to CSS, tables take more bandwidth, they aren't as
>>    cacheable, they require you to cut images, they result in pages that
>>    aren't as maintainable, and aren't rendered incrementally in many
>>    browsers.
>
> Nitpick: all major browsers render tables incrementally, as far as I
> know.  They just have to re-render them in some cases after the table
> has fully loaded, causing the page to jump, because the table sizing
> algorithm depends on the full contents of the table.

You are welcome to take that up with the authors of the Change Proposal 
that made that claim:

   http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/NoLayoutTable

- Sam Ruby
Received on Saturday, 12 March 2011 00:28:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:35 GMT