Tue, 2005-07-12 22:17
So I'm sure this topic has been already discussed but I can't find anything.So why do you think it isn't good to use tables for designin layouts?By using tables it's easyer to control the elements and put them whereever you want them...And it just don't cause headache 
Tue, 2005-07-12 22:24
#1
TABLES vs. DIVS
I will venture a link from this site for starters:
http://www.csscreator.com/css-forum/ftopic3208.html
After that, if you go to the CSS Forum Index and search the site for "layout tables" or "tables for layout" you will find more discussions.
HTH
Tue, 2005-07-12 23:10
#2
Re: TABLES vs. DIVS
BreakBD wrote:
By using tables it's easyer to control the elements and put them whereever you want them...And it just don't cause headache
Errr, no, no and no.
In addition to Lorraine's link, also try these two
http://www.csscreator.com/css-forum/ftopic10327.html
http://www.csscreator.com/css-forum/ftopic9821.html
Wed, 2005-07-13 02:03
#3
TABLES vs. DIVS
The classic link: http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/index.html
Hasn't the myth of the greatness of tables layout been busted already?
Wed, 2005-07-13 02:31
#4
TABLES vs. DIVS
Triumph wrote:
The classic link: http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/index.html
Hasn't the myth of the greatness of tables layout been busted already?
Great cartoons. 
Wed, 2005-07-13 02:36
#5
TABLES vs. DIVS
tables give me headaches now. even the semantically correct ones!
I looked for a link and have failed... but just google for table vs css you will find tonnes.
Wed, 2005-07-13 02:54
#6
TABLES vs. DIVS
Don't have to look that far: http://www.csscreator.com/css-forum/ftopic3208.html&highlight=
Wed, 2005-07-13 08:36
#7
TABLES vs. DIVS
Whilst we're on the subject of tables, I have been meaning to put forward a viewpoint for ages, so here goes...
I frequently see people reminding others that tables ARE intended to be used for layout purposes. They cite this text from the HTML specs at http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html32#table:
Quote:
Tables
HTML 3.2 includes a widely deployed subset of the specification given in RFC 1942 and can be used to markup tabular material or for layout purposes. Note that the latter role typically causes problems when rending to speech or to text only user agents.
...but I would interpret this specification differently. Surely they are talking about the layout of tabular data, not entire pages. The reason they make a distinction between markup and layout is, IMHO, because markup is to do with semantic structure and layout is to do with visual structure.
Wed, 2005-07-13 08:45
#8
TABLES vs. DIVS
That's the 3.2 spec, and keep this in mind:
the W3C wrote:
Note that the latter role typically causes problems when rending to speech or to text only user agents.
Wed, 2005-07-13 08:54
#9
TABLES vs. DIVS
It's not the case that tables (per se) being used for layout cause problems to aural UAs. But if the tables are not linearised properly, then the person listening to the aural UA can get very confused. :?
Wed, 2005-07-13 09:02
#10
TABLES vs. DIVS
...which is the case with the layout of tabular data - hence my contextual interpretation of the word 'layout'.
TPH - so what are you saying; that you agree or disagree with me?
Wed, 2005-07-13 09:07
#11
TABLES vs. DIVS
Just to chip in with a vaguely pedantry point but I found the title interesting and a very common one - "Tables Vs. Divs".
Several times I have read or heard, mostly from people who either don't know what they are talking about or are arguing FOR tables, that using CSS means just replacing tables with divs and hey presto all is well.
Where did this stupid opinion come from that if you convert say an old table site you should in the end have just an many div tags as you had table tags?!?
Err so my point - hmm, it's not "Tables Vs. Divs" but "Tables Vs. CSS For Layout"!
Told you it was pedantic but thought it should be cleared up just to remove any misunderstandings that tablelayouters might have
Wed, 2005-07-13 09:13
#12
TABLES vs. DIVS
I think you're absolutely right Briski - the distinction is important.
Wed, 2005-07-13 09:16
#13
TABLES vs. DIVS
roytheboy wrote:
...which is the case with the layout of tabular data - hence my contextual interpretation of the word 'layout'.
Precisely Roy. But not many people seem to realise that heavily nested columns/rows and their identifiers in a data table, done to squeeze in too many dimensions (when a second table would be more appropriate), are also very confusing to the listener.
Wed, 2005-07-13 10:04
#14
TABLES vs. DIVS
lol...I'm glad to see that you are not as mad at me as I thought you'll be 
).Thanks I understood:
without tables it's faster,it's easyer to redeisgn the site(because content and style sheet are separated) and besides the tables even weren't made for layout...and mostly of all with css it's much fun:))Of course there are many other things that are important too but there is no need to put them here because this site http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/index.html explain all of them very well
So Thank you all very much for help
Wed, 2005-07-13 14:04
#15
TABLES vs. DIVS
Don't forget: no slicing of images in css.