- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 20:42:02 -0500 (EST)
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- cc: Denise Wood <Denise_Wood@operamail.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Actually the point I was arguing is that "works better" is a badly defined idea. For my purposes, it tends not to mean anything much like "looks the same everywhere", and means something a lot more like "actually works welll everywhere". I do agree with Kynn that if I was serving content according to capabilities and preferences there would be some cases where I might use tables to make the look closer for a few browsers. But in most cases I wouldn't bother - the first adpatiation I would make would be to serve a simple style sheet that didn't do the layout to anything that didn't handle real CSS. Chaals On Sun, 6 Jan 2002, Kynn Bartlett wrote: By the way, just to clarify something: In general, I think it's better to use CSS layouts rather than table layouts, whenever possible. CSS layouts are better in a number of ways. But the question was "which works better for older browsers?" -- not "which is more flexible" or "which will give you more control" or "which works better in newer browsers." I think it's pretty clear that if you're talking about older browsers, table layout is better supported than CSS. [etc]
Received on Sunday, 6 January 2002 20:42:04 UTC