- From: Slaydon, Eugenia <ESlaydon@beacontec.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 20:43:44 -0500
- 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 UTC