SITE REVIEW: Conorific

http://www.csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/0 ... css&page=1

Same texhnique, the two columns do not have to start at the same position. The flower can overlap the right column and hide it from view.....

I have no quarrel with you quantum, just don't be dissin' my beloved CSS, we have have a sordidly romatic affair and no-one shall come between us just don't tell my girlfriend.....

<b>Anything</b> you can do with tables can be done with CSS-based layouts, other than vertical centering. The only difference is that it takes a little more effort and ingenuity than tables. The extra work is more than paid off by the benefits of efficient CSS coding.


I have made no secret of this fact. Yes, one is waiting content from the client, who happens to be a charity - so they don't have a lot of time to write stuff up. The other I am scrapping around with a lot. It's an extremely large site and I am very anal about the content being just perfect. I will be launching that in a few days, with only half the content ready.

But of course, rtm...I have no intention to fight with you over css and tables. Did my tone get querellous? Sorry then. I was only asking info.

I use both as convenient. Any idealism, such as I must use css even when it is a round about, is meaningless to me. May be you are right, css can do most things that tables can. That is just fine with me. I will use css for things that tables cannot.



I wanted to check your site as two column example. The new example is perfect I guess for the purpose in hand. Waiting for your site to be finished. Expecting some spectacular job.

I was just making sure that this didn't devolve into anything more then a polite conversation, as I do enjoy a good arguament

I wouldn't agree that CSS is an ideology. The benefits of it are flexibility, efficiency, accessibility, maintainability, SEO, device independance, neatness and possibly several other words ending in "ibility" that I have forgotten about I personally think it wins over purely on it's merits, rather than being a fad (or whatever)

I don't believe that you could show me a situation where tables would have any benefits over pure css, other than for actually tabulating things. I'm happy for anyone to try and prove me wrong though

Just don't expect my site to be half as purty as yours ok?

Dammit, rtm, I think we have a third rival in the harsh reviews department. Maybe we should band together.

I meant the three of us.

RTM,



Same here.




I do not think there really is some very big difference between the two in those issues. Personally, I find tables to be much easier to lay out. But that could be just my habit. I love the CSS's ability of absolute positioning though. Tables can't beat that in many cases.




The current situation with coronfic.com is a perfect example of such a thing. It'd be much much easier to accomplish two column effects with table, instead of redoing the background graphics and other div styles. Ofcourse, she can do it eventually with CSS. But using table she won't have to touch the background graphic. I'd surely go with tables in such case.



Nah RTM, where is your sense of challange?


Coronfic,



hmm...not a bad idea. Someone needs to keep an eye on you two and guide you to make sure that you are not too cruel on other poor webmasters.

Ahh but you see, in comes the very best thing about CSS because she doesn't have <i>any inline styles</i>. So to make the necessary modifications she only needs to change two files (style.css and the image file) and the changes will occur site-wide, none of the html will need to be altered. To redo the site with tables, now that would involve altering all the pages to incorporate completely different markup. Surely that would be the difficult way to do it?



Oh I like a challenge, I'm just not dumb (well not too dumb). Your graphical work is much better than mine and there is no disputing that.

quantumcloud: We're not mean, we just tell the truth. And when I meant a third rival, I was referring to you.

RTM,



If she can do it without actually touching the html of each page, I will gracefully admit the absolute supremecy of CSS.



See I am blushing now...

Coronfic,


I absolutely understand that. And I thoroughly enjoy both of your witty comments. Not to mention the usefull leads.




Well in the next message you said about banding the three of us together. Now you want to throw me out of the band wagon.

Lesson: I'm not allowed to wake up and stumble to the keyboard anymore.

<center>WOOHOO!!!!</center>

Yeah, the way the page is designed it is theoretically possible to do it by changing about 5 lines in the .css file. I say theoretically because it <b>may</b> need more editing than 5 lines depending on how it is now, but <i>everything</i> would be done in the CSS file.

If you go check out the beta pages of my site (which I posted earlier on this thread), you will see a stylesheet selector menu - all that does is change external stylesheets and uses php to set cookies. None of the html between the body tags changes at all. Note - I'm not at all happy with any of those layouts but the default. especially the "imageless purple" one which I have <b>not finished yet</b>, Sites with no graphics are too hard, and I really did chose a horrible color to use

Once I find a bowl in which I can eat generic Cheerios, I will work on this whole issue.

good use of alternatiing colors in the left side of the box... and good use of the alternating sizes of the lines.. i like the scheme... but the text font at the top is a little off i think... don't like the alternating uhh... how would you say?? maybe angles of the letters...

How come with CSS you are unable to select a certain amount of text? Is this just me or is it happening to everyone? Its the same with what ever CSS site i visit, i go to select a lil bit of the text but it selects a big chunk?!

It's not a problem for me, usually. You're special.