W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2005

RE: CSS vs tables for layout

From: Larry Israel <lisrael@cruzio.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:50:35 -0700
Message-Id: <a06210222bf57a0af7ecc@[192.168.1.104]>
To: "Mark Moore" <mark.moore@notlimited.com>, <www-style@w3.org>

> To answer your follow on question, I can't think of a relevant alternative
> that competes with the CSS vs table layout design problem.  (If they're not
> using one of those two techniques, they're doing something else.)

There really are 3 prevailing methods in common usage today:
1. Old fashioned table-based layout (usually using visual/WYSIWYG tools).
2. Tableless CSS layout.
3. A mix of the two (halfway between), which many refer to as a
"transitional approach." In this, only a single bare-bones table is used
to distinguish between the largest blocks of content (for example: header,
footer, content columns, sidebar). Tables are not nested at all. Then CSS
is used to add margin, padding, etc. to further position/align the
elements on the page (as well as to style everything).

A better resource for this discussion is the CSS-D list.

Larry
Received on Wednesday, 21 September 2005 23:51:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:40 GMT