css or tables

[nathankippen]

I would like to get people's opinion on whether or not its better
define a web page's layout in CSS (using position) or use tables for a
webpage layout?

Here is a link to the first website that I have built from the
gournd-up. Please leave some feedback if you have any.

http://www.sandiegoonthebeach.com


p.s. it's not completely done, but it's approaching there.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

I would like to get people's opinion on whether or not its better
define a web page's layout in CSS (using position) or use tables for a
webpage layout?

a very *quick* scan of this newsgroup will answer your question

 

[Thomas Jollans]

a very *quick* scan of this newsgroup will answer your question

and the answer is CSS

 

[Guest]

and the answer is CSS

'cause the tables are old, and were not invented to use for positioning,
which some ppl still can't understand and make heavy, 200 kB htmls...

Regards,
Talthen

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

'cause the tables are old, and were not invented to use for positioning,
which some ppl still can't understand and make heavy, 200 kB htmls...

additionally CSS saves you time and effort, if all you want to do is
change the appearance of blocks of text in tables requires extensive
editing of your HTML, whereas via DIV's an CSS only need to change your CSS.

 

[Andy Dingley]

I would like to get people's opinion

Your lack of basic respect for other newsgroup posters, evidenced by
your clear total failure to even _try_ searching the archive, earns you
an auto-plonk on sight.

 

[Neredbojias]

With neither quill nor qualm, (e-mail address removed) quothed:

I would like to get people's opinion on whether or not its better
define a web page's layout in CSS (using position) or use tables for a
webpage layout?

Layout? Ah, neither. The best layout is done with html.

Here is a link to the first website that I have built from the
gournd-up. Please leave some feedback if you have any.

http://www.sandiegoonthebeach.com


p.s. it's not completely done, but it's approaching there.

Your background's too bright for the content.

 

[Jake]

Your lack of basic respect for other newsgroup posters, evidenced by
your clear total failure to even _try_ searching the archive, earns you
an auto-plonk on sight.

I feel sure he's full of remorse now that you've pointed that out to him
.....;-)

Regards.

 

[rf]

I feel sure he's full of remorse now that you've pointed that out to him
....;-)

Given that the OP is yet another one from groups.google what do you think?

Cheers
Richard.

 

[Marc]

I would like to get people's opinion on whether or not its better
define a web page's layout in CSS (using position) or use tables for a
webpage layout?

Here is a link to the first website that I have built from the
gournd-up. Please leave some feedback if you have any.

http://www.sandiegoonthebeach.com

Work on the quality of your pictures. On first glance I thought the
website was showing pictures of a crumbling old building due to the poor
resizing of your photos. It's not a website that would convince me to
stay at your hotel.

And I agree with the other poster - the background needs to go - it's
too distracting.

Marc

 

[smokeyd]

Hey not a bad first attempt though... There is also the issue of
accessibility, if you want your web site viewable by as many people as
possible then use css.

 

[Marc]

Hey not a bad first attempt though... There is also the issue of
accessibility, if you want your web site viewable by as many people as
possible then use css.

Okay, I rephrase - the *photos* wouldn't persuade me to stay at your
hotel, which looks in those pictures to be falling over.

Marc

 

[Jake]

Hey not a bad first attempt though... There is also the issue of
accessibility, if you want your web site viewable by as many people as
possible then use css.

That's a very interesting comment. Could you why?

Regards.

 

[smokeyd]

Why what?

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Why what?

Why what??

Please learn to quote what you are referring to, you know like the stuff
above my question ;-)

 

[smokeyd]

That's a very interesting comment. Could you why?

Could I why? What is the question here?

 

[rf]

Why what??

Please learn to quote what you are referring to, you know like the stuff
above my question ;-)

smokeyd is yet another of the dreaded google groups users.

 

[Jake]

Could I why? What is the question here?

An example of the brain being quicker than the fingers ;-)

So. Could you (explain) why?

 

[smokeyd]

Web sites built using CSS separate the page content from the design of
the web site. This makes them more accessible to users browsing the
net by other means than the usual I.E. For example, a screen reader
when reading a site using tables will read out the <table> tags and
spacer images so may take some time before the user actually gets to
the information that they require. With CSS there is no formatting on
the page so the screen reader gets straight to the useful content.
Anyway I am sure a quick Google on CSS and accessibility will explain
it better and in more depth than I can.

rf what is your point?

 

[Marc]

Web sites built using CSS separate the page content from the design of
the web site. This makes them more accessible to users browsing the
net by other means than the usual I.E. For example, a screen reader
when reading a site using tables will read out the <table> tags and
spacer images so may take some time before the user actually gets to
the information that they require. With CSS there is no formatting on
the page so the screen reader gets straight to the useful content.
Anyway I am sure a quick Google on CSS and accessibility will explain
it better and in more depth than I can.

rf what is your point?

Will you *please* include at least some of the post you're replying to
within your post - this post appears to have nothing to do with what
you've replied to...?!

Marc