CSS vs Tables

[fris]

http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/everything.html

Pretty informative article.

[Deej]

Good stuff

[Deej]

I wonder how many articles there are out there that say tables are better than css divisions...
Im looking at you AlienQ

[brandonstills]

HTML / CSS is one big hack thrown on top of each other. It's amazing the amount of BS a designer has to go through just to get do what he wants. And let's not even get into cross-browser compatibility. I wish they would get rid of HTML / CSS and start with something that actually flows for making sites.

[brandonstills]

I wonder how many articles there are out there that say tables are better than css divisions...
Im looking at you AlienQ

I've heard arguments in both directions and they are both valid in my opinion.

[StuartD]

Written for the masses and not really in a way to convince anyone really wanting difinitive information, but it is all very accurate.

What gets me is, no designer would set up a grid in Photoshop and design each square separately and then piece them together for a final product.

What they do is design each LAYER and have them position in relation to each other for a final product.

Yet here we have actual designers trying to convince everyone that table layouts are better than CSS layouts. Table = grid. CSS = layers.

I'm beginning to wonder if these same designers us Excel for their designs instead of Photoshop.

[Deej]

HTML / CSS is one big hack thrown on top of each other. It's amazing the amount of BS a designer has to go through just to get do what he wants. And let's not even get into cross-browser compatibility. I wish they would get rid of HTML / CSS and start with something that actually flows for making sites.

its not that hard if you know all the little compatibility tricks

its only hack when you use hack code...

no offense

I learned the tricks the hard way myself - lots of frustration

[StuartD]

HTML / CSS is one big hack thrown on top of each other. It's amazing the amount of BS a designer has to go through just to get do what he wants. And let's not even get into cross-browser compatibility. I wish they would get rid of HTML / CSS and start with something that actually flows for making sites.

IE is the only issue with cross browser compatibility because they refuse to do things the way everyone else on the planet does it.
And I know people will disagree but there are some things about tables that are different with IE and other browsers as well.

CSS is not a big hack. You should look into the history of it a bit more before making statements like that.

[Ethersync]

bump for alien?

[RevTKS69]

...heard on the frustration part

"its not that hard if you know all the little compatibility tricks

I learned the tricks the hard way myself - lots of frustration"

I just started working with HTML/CSS in November, and the frustration runs high right now because I don't know all the 'tricks.'

And yes, I do google for them and such, but if you have absolutely no clue why 'xyz' is not behaving the way it should in IE, it's hard to google for it. Anyway, I guess I'm just posting to vent about IE a bit...lol.

[Deej]

"its not that hard if you know all the little compatibility tricks

I learned the tricks the hard way myself - lots of frustration"

I just started working with HTML/CSS in November, and the frustration runs high right now because I don't know all the 'tricks.'

And yes, I do google for them and such, but if you have absolutely no clue why 'xyz' is not behaving the way it should in IE, it's hard to google for it. Anyway, I guess I'm just posting to vent about IE a bit...lol.

you named it... IE is the stubborn older brother, but lately, coming around...

[crockett]

If tables for designs are stupid, then why is CSS now adding tables?

I think all these people that think everything needs to be done in CS are just a bunch johny jump on the band wagons. Tables serve their purpose very well. If you don't need exotic positions for images over text ect..ect.. then tables can very quicly allow you to toss a layout together that will work in any browser.

Meanwhile you will be spending 2 days trying to figure out why this looks this way in IE.. but some other way in FF, when using css.

Meanwhile the SE's couldn't give a damn if the layout is CSS or tables..

[ScriptWorkz]

I got into this debate a while ago on here and ended up quiting in frustration thanks to alienq's impossible logic on why tables where better then CSS.

Long story short, use tables for tabular data folks, use css and structural markup for your layout / implementations. Utilizing proper markup and css saves you bandwidth, helps with seo, and at the end of the day saves / makes you money.

Don't listen to hack designers / coders that tell you it's too flaky / incompatible. They are dinosaurs that don't want to adapt or learn something new. I was pretty comfortable w/ tables there for a while as was anyone that wrote any serious html during that time period, but the time has come and support is wide enough where everyone should be adopting or have a plan to start adopting web standards right now.

Many serious developers / designers, myself included know from first hand experience that it is completely possible to create just about any layout using proper markup and css and is actually easier to create / maintain these sites (unlike what the table zealots preach). We utilize these things on a daily basis to create clean, fast loading, semantically correct and accessible pages and i personally maintain atleast 20 sites that would be a complete nightmare to work with if they weren't coded properly using structural markup and well formed css.

[ScriptWorkz]

If tables for designs are stupid, then why is CSS now adding tables?

Can i have some of what your smokin?

In response to what you added on your edit, it wouldn't take you two days if you knew how to write css. Just because something is faster for you doesn't mean it's anywhere close to the right way to do something.

[JD]

like anything, being able to be cross browser compatible the first time around or knowing the real fixes (not hacks) comes with experience. I rarely have issues with IE now because I've taught myself the tricks.

Btw, I still use tables when called for. Certain things make more sense/use fewer lines when table based. The only time I gag with tables is when they're nested 3-4-5 levels deep...

[Deej]

If tables for designs are stupid, then why is CSS now adding tables?

I think all these people that think everything needs to be done in CS are just a bunch johny jump on the band wagons. Tables serve their purpose very well. If you don't need exotic positions for images over text ect..ect.. then tables can very quicly allow you to toss a layout together that will work in any browser.

Meanwhile you will be spending 2 days trying to figure out why this looks this way in IE.. but some other way in FF, when using css.

Meanwhile the SE's couldn't give a damn if the layout is CSS or tables..

This is a valid statement, I dont think anyone ever said it wasnt...

In fact I keep trying to say tables are useful, but CSS is better...

I still use tables every day... But css is not some johnny jump wagon whatever... it can be used to up the dynaic nature of your site... it IS superior to tables..

Tables although of lesser value are most often equally useful...

[candyflip]

If tables for designs are stupid, then why is CSS now adding tables?

Adding them now?

[Deej]

like anything, being able to be cross browser compatible the first time around or knowing the real fixes (not hacks) comes with experience. I rarely have issues with IE now because I've taught myself the tricks.

Btw, I still use tables when called for. Certain things make more sense/use fewer lines when table based. The only time I gag with tables is when they're nested 3-4-5 levels deep...

God and baby jesus weep in happiness for you, young fornicator

[crockett]

Can i have some of what your smokin?

In response to what you added on your edit, it wouldn't take you two days if you knew how to write css. Just because something is faster for you doesn't mean it's anywhere close to the right way to do something.

http://thinkvitamin.com/design/css/t...in-css-layout/


The next version of FF and IE8 will work with the new CSS tables.. As I said if tables sucked so bad, then why did they decide to add them to CSS.

[Machete_]

I saw some of the documentation to IE8 and it looks like .... on paper at least .... that the CSS problems there were in ie7 and 6 will be gone.

[Voodoo]

I like to style my CSS with tables.

[ScriptWorkz]

http://thinkvitamin.com/design/css/t...in-css-layout/


The next version of FF and IE8 will work with the new CSS tables.. As I said if tables sucked so bad, then why did they decide to add them to CSS.

They're just talking about the display property, and the way you can make things display like table cells. It's used in order to completely remove tables from markup so that you can mark up your content semantically correct and still get the grid like appearance / behaviour of tables. Oddly enough, the article you posted is explaining a way to completely get rid of all those pesky table, tr, and td tags in favor of semantic tags and css.

The only thing this article is really talking about in regards to 'tables coming to css' is IE 8's upcoming support for these properties that have been around for a while.

It might be wise to know what your talking about before trying to debate w/ someone that is in the trenches and using web standards every day on any serious level.

[Deej]

I like to style my CSS with tables.

yoooourrreeee..... Comfortable Sitting Scene?

[baX]

its in my bookmark
thanks

[sortie]

CSS = Bush

Tables = Obama

[crockett]

They're just talking about the display property, and the way you can make things display like table cells. It's used in order to completely remove tables from markup so that you can mark up your content semantically correct and still get the grid like appearance / behaviour of tables. Oddly enough, the article you posted is explaining a way to completely get rid of all those pesky table, tr, and td tags in favor of semantic tags and css.

The only thing this article is really talking about in regards to 'tables coming to css' is IE 8's upcoming support for these properties that have been around for a while.

It might be wise to know what your talking about before trying to debate w/ someone that is in the trenches and using web standards every day on any serious level.

Well that was just an article I grabbed from google.. do a search on CSS tables.. it's coming and will change the way CSS works.

http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/tables.html

[AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE]

I got into this debate a while ago on here and ended up quiting in frustration thanks to alienq's impossible logic on why tables where better then CSS.

Long story short, use tables for tabular data folks, use css and structural markup for your layout / implementations. Utilizing proper markup and css saves you bandwidth, helps with seo, and at the end of the day saves / makes you money.

Don't listen to hack designers / coders that tell you it's too flaky / incompatible. They are dinosaurs that don't want to adapt or learn something new. I was pretty comfortable w/ tables there for a while as was anyone that wrote any serious html during that time period, but the time has come and support is wide enough where everyone should be adopting or have a plan to start adopting web standards right now.

Many serious developers / designers, myself included know from first hand experience that it is completely possible to create just about any layout using proper markup and css and is actually easier to create / maintain these sites (unlike what the table zealots preach). We utilize these things on a daily basis to create clean, fast loading, semantically correct and accessible pages and i personally maintain atleast 20 sites that would be a complete nightmare to work with if they weren't coded properly using structural markup and well formed css.

You only got frustrated because I was right. You can not prove CSS is better for SE's because the fact remains that CSS layouts has no advancement over table based layouts when it comes to SEO. THE FUCKING MARK UP LANGUAGE IS IGNORED BY SPIDERS!!!! For the 20th time today. SO if you create seriously shitty code no matter what you use CSS/DIV or TD will fucking suck.

Is CSS easy to update? Yeah IF You know what you are doing but other than that I would say no, not for the typical client. Almost every client I have come accross that has had a CSS design was pissed off about it because they can not change anything on it except maybe the text. Almost every client I have come accross worries about cross browser issues and I am glad to tell them that my design's will have ZERO browser issues and my code is straight forward and easy enough for them to take the source PSD and forever more do the updates themselves.

But like I said before everyone has a method. You are a script kiddie, you do not relie on graphics so much, I am designer I relie on graphics and in the middle are clients that buy our services. They wont relie on you to do a credible design no more than they would relie on me to create a credible script.

Some people can whine about IE and why CSS does not show right in many cases and in my book and experience that is no excuse to a client. You can not sit and tell a client oh yeah the majority of the world uses IE sorry your site is going to have display issues with this CSS design! LOL! Yeah... That'll work.

You guys keep doing that, because I am seriously needing work these days. Your clients will come around to me eventually and see the truth that working code that displays accross all browsers without issue win's everytime.

I am done with you CSS Nazi's have a good evening.

[Machete_]

at least its not as bad as XHTML

[Voodoo]

yoooourrreeee..... Comfortable Sitting Scene?

<style type="text/css">
<!--
body {
<table id="MyPrettyTable" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2">
  <tr>
    <td>1</td>
    <td>2</td>
    <td>3 pretty cells, ah ah ah!</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>4</td>
    <td>5</td>
    <td>6 pretty cells, ah ah ah!</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>7</td>
    <td>8</td>
    <td>9... 9 pretty cells! AH AH AH!!!</td>
  </tr>
</table>
}
-->
</style>

[AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE]

<style type="text/css">
<!--
body {
<table id="MyPrettyTable" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2">
  <tr>
    <td>1</td>
    <td>2</td>
    <td>3 pretty cells, ah ah ah!</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>4</td>
    <td>5</td>
    <td>6 pretty cells, ah ah ah!</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>7</td>
    <td>8</td>
    <td>9... 9 pretty cells! AH AH AH!!!</td>
  </tr>
</table>
}
-->
</style>

And there you have it folks.
It couldnt be summed up any better.

[Voodoo]

Although, I prefer using CSS. I don't really care who uses what. LOL, I can do both. If a client wants tables, they get tables. If a client wants CSS, they get CSS.

[Deej]

You only got frustrated because I was right. You can not prove CSS is better for SE's because the fact remains that CSS layouts has no advancement over table based layouts when it comes to SEO. THE FUCKING MARK UP LANGUAGE IS IGNORED BY SPIDERS!!!! For the 20th time today. SO if you create seriously shitty code no matter what you use CSS/DIV or TD will fucking suck.

Is CSS easy to update? Yeah IF You know what you are doing but other than that I would say no, not for the typical client. Almost every client I have come accross that has had a CSS design was pissed off about it because they can not change anything on it except maybe the text. Almost every client I have come accross worries about cross browser issues and I am glad to tell them that my design's will have ZERO browser issues and my code is straight forward and easy enough for them to take the source PSD and forever more do the updates themselves.

But like I said before everyone has a method. You are a script kiddie, you do not relie on graphics so much, I am designer I relie on graphics and in the middle are clients that buy our services. They wont relie on you to do a credible design no more than they would relie on me to create a credible script.

Some people can whine about IE and why CSS does not show right in many cases and in my book and experience that is no excuse to a client. You can not sit and tell a client oh yeah the majority of the world uses IE sorry your site is going to have display issues with this CSS design! LOL! Yeah... That'll work.

You guys keep doing that, because I am seriously needing work these days. Your clients will come around to me eventually and see the truth that working code that displays accross all browsers without issue win's everytime.

I am done with you CSS Nazi's have a good evening.

again, youre wrong...

CSS IS SEO beneficial!!!

you can make sure youre h1 tags are legit and still aesthetically pleasing, you can rearrange your navigation so it reads info first... some do this, I do not... I just surround it all with navigation... you can allow endless text in a small area... you can emphasize keywords without malking them actually stand out to the surfer... you can make list link navigation since SEs like list linking over plain anchor linking... although anchor linking is good, list linking with proper anchor words is better... so you can use the benefit of the list link without making it look like a list link...

I can keep going as to why youre 'theory' of CSS not being SEO beneficial is false... but you wont believe me...

ALso - if you know how to strict code and you know all the proper formulas... IE will show the same as FF or safari or whatever... if you just half ass the css code, of course the compatibility will be slim.... I had these issues in the past, until i found the right formulas and proper code... perhaps you should find them as well ... ill even help you if you would like...

Im not saying you suck man, Im saying your theories (because they are only theories) of css are wrong...

I dont look to pester everything you say, only your crap you spew about css... thats all man... please, realize youre wrong about css... it will help everyone out if you do...

[Deej]

Although, I prefer using CSS. I don't really care who uses what. LOL, I can do both. If a client wants tables, they get tables. If a client wants CSS, they get CSS.

Solid statement

[ScriptWorkz]

You only got frustrated because I was right. You can not prove CSS is better for SE's because the fact remains that CSS layouts has no advancement over table based layouts when it comes to SEO. THE FUCKING MARK UP LANGUAGE IS IGNORED BY SPIDERS!!!! For the 20th time today. SO if you create seriously shitty code no matter what you use CSS/DIV or TD will fucking suck.

I got frustrated because your a fucking idiot that clings to your archaic beliefs, even in the face of undeniable fact. I never once said that CSS alone has any benefits to SEO, however it is a known fact that Clean, Semantically correct markup (such as that achieved when using valid xhtml / css properly) is good for SEO, it's less crap for the spiders to wade through and it's easier to understand. I'm sure you'll argue w/ me again on this, but instead you should just prove you can read and do a google for 'SEO benefits of semantic markup and css' before you respond like a tard.

Is CSS easy to update? Yeah IF You know what you are doing but other than that I would say no, not for the typical client. Almost every client I have come accross that has had a CSS design was pissed off about it because they can not change anything on it except maybe the text. Almost every client I have come accross worries about cross browser issues and I am glad to tell them that my design's will have ZERO browser issues and my code is straight forward and easy enough for them to take the source PSD and forever more do the updates themselves.

CSS is easy to update for everyone. Your telling me it's easier for someone to find your bgcolor="#000" 20 levels deep in some POS table then it is for them to find background-color: #000; in a handful of css declarations?

As for browser compatibility, i don't know how many times i have to say it. IT IS POSSIBLE TO CREATE A LAYOUT THAT WORKS CONSISTANTLY ACROSS ALL BROWSERS USING SEMANTIC MARKUP AND CSS. YOU DO NOT NEED TABLES FOR THIS.

Get it that time? Me and thousands of other developers worldwide do it every day because we're actually professionals that take pride in doing our job right.

Your code being anything other then complete garbage makes me laugh. Even your own website is incredibly simple yet has a complete clusterfuck of tables and crap in the source. Yeah, 20 - 30 table cells across 10 - 15 rows is alot more straight forward then 3 or 4 divs it would taken to lay it out properly.

But like I said before everyone has a method. You are a script kiddie, you do not relie on graphics so much, I am designer I relie on graphics and in the middle are clients that buy our services. They wont relie on you to do a credible design no more than they would relie on me to create a credible script.

I'm a professional you tool, not a script kiddie. I can code just about anything in about 8 differant languages. In my professional opinion no one should rely on you for anything further then the PSD's you produce, and honestly i'm not sure why on earth anyone would even hire you for that.

Some people can whine about IE and why CSS does not show right in many cases and in my book and experience that is no excuse to a client. You can not sit and tell a client oh yeah the majority of the world uses IE sorry your site is going to have display issues with this CSS design! LOL! Yeah... That'll work.

Not sure what this has to do w/ anything. I don't make excuses to my clients because i don't need to. My code works properly everytime, period.

You guys keep doing that, because I am seriously needing work these days. Your clients will come around to me eventually and see the truth that working code that displays accross all browsers without issue win's everytime.

I am done with you CSS Nazi's have a good evening.

Maybe you wouldn't need work if you'd adapt instead of clinging to your archaic beliefs on why tables are so superior. All your clients are starting to see through your bullshit table loving propaganda and are coming to guys like me to have their pages done properly.

For the record, i doubt my clients would have anything to do w/ the likes of you, your kind of a tool

[ScriptWorkz]

These threads always piss me off and some peoples ignorance never ceases to amaze me.

Web Standards Are Good For Your Business. Table based layouts in this day and age in an industry that is web based are retarded. You people should demand all your templates / designs are coded in semantically correct XHTML 1 strict and Valid CSS if your serious about your sites / business.

That's all folks, i've said my peace and i'm out before my blood pressure rises.

[Miguel T]

Interesting Read!

[iMind]

HTML / CSS is one big hack thrown on top of each other. It's amazing the amount of BS a designer has to go through just to get do what he wants. And let's not even get into cross-browser compatibility. I wish they would get rid of HTML / CSS and start with something that actually flows for making sites.

incorrect, unless you're talking about a designer that barely knows what he's doing..

I can code any layout, bug free.. with one stylesheet, and NO hacks.
none of that IF IE , shit either, just straight up nice and clean XHTML/CSS.

that's a fact.

I used to curse and swear and think that CSS was buggy and just a hack job, but fact is once you know what makes the different browsers choke, you can pull off beautiful semantic code without a single hack that looks great ( and the same ) in all browsers.. and that includes IE6

[AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Your code being anything other then complete garbage makes me laugh. Even your own website is incredibly simple yet has a complete clusterfuck of tables and crap in the source. Yeah, 20 - 30 table cells across 10 - 15 rows is alot more straight forward then 3 or 4 divs it would taken to lay it out properly.

Ya must be looking at someone else site uhmm I do not even have nested tables and the longest TD is uhh I think 4 accross. But if you are such a pro you would know clean code always yields good results in SEO. That was discussed earlier Mr. Professional.

I'm a professional you tool, not a script kiddie. I can code just about anything in about 8 differant languages. In my professional opinion no one should rely on you for anything further then the PSD's you produce, and honestly i'm not sure why on earth anyone would even hire you for that.

Oh you are a script Kiddie and know it all now. Thats definatly being a professional.

Not sure what this has to do w/ anything. I don't make excuses to my clients because i don't need to. My code works properly everytime, period.

I didnt say you make excuses but you are certainly touchie about it thats pretty professional of you.

Maybe you wouldn't need work if you'd adapt instead of clinging to your archaic beliefs on why tables are so superior. All your clients are starting to see through your bullshit table loving propaganda and are coming to guys like me to have their pages done properly.

Yeah I bet they are going to you, in droves, you are after all the professional on everything. Sure. Expert Photoshopper, knows 8 programming languages, I mean dang dude you got it nailed...

For the record, i doubt my clients would have anything to do w/ the likes of you, your kind of a tool

I doubt they would have much to do with me either, I mean with a god like you at the helm and the thousands of others why would they come to me?

But hey man if even one of them decides they are done with your expertise and professional deuschebaggery maybe you could throw me a bone , I am starving American Artist and seriously need work right now.

[candyflip]

So much for your so called "change of ways". I see you're back to your old self.

[iMind]

So much for your so called "change of ways". I see you're back to your old self.

Yeah, no kidding..

Remember how everyone got all mad when I posted his meltdown here ?
This is why.. the guys a fucking write off

[fris]

Alienq isnt qualified to answer any questions on design, look at his work, hes a fucking bum

[fris]

http://www.alistapart.com/articles/seo

http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/css-and-seo.shtml

http://www.avangate.com/articles/seo-css_64.htm

http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/seo-blog/i...alid-html-css/

http://www.darrenatkinson.co.uk/articles/boost-seo-css/

http://www.nick-stone.com/css_seo.php