Back To Website Design Forum

CSS Should Not Be Used For Layout

  • spork
  • Brewmaster
  • Silver Member
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Sep 22, 2003
  • Posts: 6128
  • Loc: Seattle, WA
  • Status: Offline

Post February 2nd, 2009, 9:47 pm

Quote:
CSS is really cool. It is useful for a lot of things. The basic idea of separating content from presentation is sound. But when it comes to layout, the design of CSS is fundamentally flawed. Use tables instead.


http://www.flownet.com/ron/css-rant.html

An interesting rant, at the very least. Thoughts?
The Beer Monocle. Classy.
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2008
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post February 2nd, 2009, 9:47 pm

  • digitalMedia
  • a.k.a. dM
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Dec 29, 2003
  • Posts: 5169
  • Loc: SC-USA
  • Status: Offline

Post February 3rd, 2009, 5:12 am

I love when people run opposite to 'common' belief/knowledge/understandings. So much more enjoyable than people who just spew dogma.

In some ways I agree with their point(s). Basic layout is done on a grid, therefore, tables are very straight forward and predictable when converting a layout to markup.

In many ways, I'd love to go back to tabled layouts - valign, expandable containers, browser interpretation, etc.

However, long term, I think the technology and its root concepts are still developing and doesn't require an all or nothing decision at this time.
- dM
  • neksus
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Sep 10, 2004
  • Posts: 2194
  • Loc: Canada
  • Status: Offline

Post February 3rd, 2009, 10:57 am

Anybody look at his source?
Mr. use-tables-for-layouts used CSS and top-down elements :P
  • Merlyn
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Dec 04, 2003
  • Posts: 1143
  • Loc: Oregon
  • Status: Offline

Post February 3rd, 2009, 2:12 pm

LOL he did.
"Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore" -Andre Gide
  • digitalMedia
  • a.k.a. dM
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Dec 29, 2003
  • Posts: 5169
  • Loc: SC-USA
  • Status: Offline

Post February 3rd, 2009, 3:25 pm

Wouldn't it be great if we had some sort of GRID object for primary containers? Something like a table, but without the tedious overhead.

Just an errant thought.
- dM
  • spork
  • Brewmaster
  • Silver Member
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Sep 22, 2003
  • Posts: 6128
  • Loc: Seattle, WA
  • Status: Offline

Post February 3rd, 2009, 4:05 pm

Where's UNFLUX's "nodding" smiley when you need it?
The Beer Monocle. Classy.
  • graphixboy
  • Control + Z
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Jul 11, 2005
  • Posts: 1828
  • Loc: In the Great White North
  • Status: Offline

Post February 4th, 2009, 11:45 am

digitalMedia wrote:
Wouldn't it be great if we had some sort of GRID object for primary containers? Something like a table, but without the tedious overhead.


css3 to the rescue http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-layout/ Now if only browsers would support it...
If at first you don't succeed F1... If that doesn't work try Google!
//// Designer, Developer & Teacher - Interactive, Motion and 3D \\\\
Portfolio at WhenImNotSleeping.com
  • joebert
  • Sledgehammer
  • Genius
  • No Avatar
  • Joined: Feb 10, 2004
  • Posts: 13455
  • Loc: Florida
  • Status: Offline

Post February 4th, 2009, 1:53 pm

What if we just used a single <table> inside the <body> element to give us our columns, then used table-less stuff for everything else ?

Technically it wouldn't be a misuse of a <table> since you actually are dealing with a row of columns, which is what a <table> is designed to be used for.

It seems like the main layouts columns are peoples biggest gripe when this argument comes up. If we use both, everyone should be happy, no ?
Strong with this one, the sudo is.
  • Bogey
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Jul 14, 2005
  • Posts: 8211
  • Loc: USA
  • Status: Offline

Post February 4th, 2009, 3:08 pm

joebert wrote:
What if we just used a single <table> inside the <body> element to give us our columns, then used table-less stuff for everything else ?

Technically it wouldn't be a misuse of a <table> since you actually are dealing with a row of columns, which is what a <table> is designed to be used for.

It seems like the main layouts columns are peoples biggest gripe when this argument comes up. If we use both, everyone should be happy, no ?

But that's compromising... that is not a complete victory :o
"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:" Matthew 3:8
  • joebert
  • Sledgehammer
  • Genius
  • No Avatar
  • Joined: Feb 10, 2004
  • Posts: 13455
  • Loc: Florida
  • Status: Offline

Post February 4th, 2009, 3:52 pm

So is Neapolitan ice cream, but that works.
Strong with this one, the sudo is.
  • digitalMedia
  • a.k.a. dM
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Dec 29, 2003
  • Posts: 5169
  • Loc: SC-USA
  • Status: Offline

Post February 4th, 2009, 7:46 pm

Compromise is bad? Complete victory? Sounds like tyranny. :P
- dM
  • digitalMedia
  • a.k.a. dM
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Dec 29, 2003
  • Posts: 5169
  • Loc: SC-USA
  • Status: Offline

Post February 4th, 2009, 7:47 pm

graphixboy wrote:
Now if only browsers would support it...


<you are wise>exactly</you are wise>
- dM
  • locust
  • Beginner
  • Beginner
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Apr 02, 2007
  • Posts: 44
  • Loc: Austin, TX
  • Status: Offline

Post February 4th, 2009, 8:51 pm

Good points. I fell out of the loop of web design for awhile. I was working as a web developer full time back in the last 90's when tables were just how things were done.

I have since gotten back into it. Now when I look at source code, most of the time designers are using divs. It was weird at first, but now I'm getting used to it. What I like about divs is that you can easily see the layout structure. Tables can be a real pain in the rear when you're trying to figure out what goes where...

So, I like divs now. Still, they are a pain sometimes too, like the guy in the article pointed out.
  • Bogey
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Jul 14, 2005
  • Posts: 8211
  • Loc: USA
  • Status: Offline

Post February 4th, 2009, 9:23 pm

Actually, to speak about the article... I see a lot of things I seem to agree with, and yet, with the current programming technology, disagree with. I must say that I agree with his point of view. Seeing how CSS means Cascading Style Sheet, I would say that it was created for the style... the web-candies and web conformity, rather than layout, but seeing how you can do the same with DIVs and XHTML (Extended HTML), I would rather use CSS and DIVs (DIVs is HTML as well... just like TABLES... just that it doesn't use so much code to create a simple box).

Let me explain my stand point here as it may seem unclear at first. I agree with most of what the article at random ranting says, but I believe that stands true in the point of HTML. I always assumed that XHTML was DIVs and strictly CSS and that HTML was tables with CSS working together... The reason being, was because with DIVs, if you want a different layout, all you have to do is change the CSS, making the layout dynamic... like forum posts and forums, which are directly related (in a sense).

To change the text in a forum thread, all you have to do is alter the Database table and it would change the text here... even configurations... enable the Email blocking, and people won't be seeing your email address and thus, won't be able to send you email messages.

With CSS, you change the CSS and you don't have to alter the DIV's and the HTML part of it... and you can completely change it all... this was shown evident in the CSS Competition here on OZZU itself.

Although that may be possible with TABLES, it might be possible to a degree and limited as well. But don't hold me on this, I have never tested TABLES... I just used DIVs for this. I used to use TABLES before I learned CSS, but I never used CSS alongside with tables (That was a bad experience).

I'm done with my rant here... I shall continue when more things come to mind. :D
"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:" Matthew 3:8
  • Zwirko
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Joined: May 29, 2005
  • Posts: 1417
  • Loc: 55° N, 3° W
  • Status: Offline

Post February 5th, 2009, 10:36 am

Sounds like a case of flat-earth syndrome to me.
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2008
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post February 5th, 2009, 10:36 am

1, 2, 3

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 37 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 116 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
 

© 2011 Unmelted, LLC. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.