Does anyone create sites without using tables for layout?

[mat]

I know that a trend is to create websites that are pure css, and don't
rely on tables for layout. Are asp.net devs taking that approach also? I
checked a couple of major asp.net websites like newegg.com and they do
seem to use tables for layout.

Any info out there focused on table-less asp.net dev?

 

[Hillbilly]

Most of us try but I think our dirty little secret is most also cop out and
start using tables here and there when their pages become increasingly
complex. You'll note most of the "pure" CSS sites are often little more than
what we call StackPanels in XAML using CSS to declare perhaps 2 or 3 at most
container type implementations expressed as styled HTML.

Are you using any of the libaries yet like YUI CSS or Blueprint?

 

[mat]

That is interesting; thank you. No I am not an asp.net dev yet...I've
not needed to so far, but the time is coming. I have been able to build
apps using winforms etc to date and have been able to avoid writing
directly to a browser (do use various cms). I would really like to get
any input you have to offer re how to make asp.net as sleek looking (ie
as little like old html pages/forms) as possible, with the minimun
effort. YUI CSS and Blueprint, are they what you use? I've no exposure
to either.

 

[James Irvine]

I know that a trend is to create websites that are pure css, and don't
rely on tables for layout. Are asp.net devs taking that approach also? I
checked a couple of major asp.net websites like newegg.com and they do
seem to use tables for layout.

Any info out there focused on table-less asp.net dev?

Here's a site I did for a friend with a home page that just happens to be
table-free: http://www.barbarareed.org/ And it dynamically adjusts it's
width to fill the browser. With new monitors being 'widescreen' these days,
the old fixed-width pages are beginning to look dated. Of course, there's
nothing wrong with using tables, they just shouldn't be used to define the
page layout.

And here's a good link to the other advantages of CSS based pages, most
notably the huge performance hit when tables define a page:
http://www.chromaticsites.com/blog/13-reasons-why-css-is-superior-to-tables-in-website-design/

Another cool thing with CSS based is you can control which parts of your
page appear first, drawing the viewers attention to where you want them.

 

[Hillbilly]

To make pages look as little like web pages created using
HTML/CSS/JavaScript we use Flash or Silverlight both of which have a steep
learning curve which is much steeper than HTML "web forms" development.

 

[mat]

To make pages look as little like web pages created using
HTML/CSS/JavaScript we use Flash or Silverlight both of which have a steep
learning curve which is much steeper than HTML "web forms" development.

That's interesting too...flex 4 and the silverlight kit that comes with
vs2010 have been getting much more attention than asp.net over here too.
We just do have to get some chops at general web dev and asp.net is
probably the simplest tool to pick up. Flex 4 and SL + RIA Services are
still not quite ready, so it's a good time to learn some asp.net.

When I searched for blueprint, I was not sure if I found the exact
framework you referenced in your original reply. Can you give me a url?
Thanks.

 

[Gregory A. Beamer]

I know that a trend is to create websites that are pure css, and don't
rely on tables for layout. Are asp.net devs taking that approach also?
I checked a couple of major asp.net websites like newegg.com and they
do seem to use tables for layout.

Most developers are using the drag and drop crap and not taking any
intiative. ;-)

Actually, unless you head into MVC, you end up with more work to do pure
CSS, as the ASP.NET controls use a lot of table mark-up. The CSS
Friendly adapters offer another direction, of course, but that means one
more thing in your project. This changes a bit in Framework 4.0(Visual
Studio 2010) and I believe you will see some changes then.

Any info out there focused on table-less asp.net dev?

None that I know of, except perhaps the CSS Friendly adapters site. I
have blogged about it in the past, although that was not the primary
focus.

The biggest hurdle is creating a primary "framework" or "skin" or
"chrome" that is CSS driven. This is done in your master page. You can
then use the CSS Friendly adapters to continue to CSS-ize the rest of
the bits.

Peace and Grace,


--
Gregory A. Beamer (MVP)

Twitter: @gbworld
Blog: http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com

*******************************************
| Think outside the box! |
*******************************************

 

[mat]

Most developers are using the drag and drop crap and not taking any
intiative. ;-)

Actually, unless you head into MVC, you end up with more work to do pure
CSS, as the ASP.NET controls use a lot of table mark-up. The CSS
Friendly adapters offer another direction, of course, but that means one
more thing in your project. This changes a bit in Framework 4.0(Visual
Studio 2010) and I believe you will see some changes then.


None that I know of, except perhaps the CSS Friendly adapters site. I
have blogged about it in the past, although that was not the primary
focus.

The biggest hurdle is creating a primary "framework" or "skin" or
"chrome" that is CSS driven. This is done in your master page. You can
then use the CSS Friendly adapters to continue to CSS-ize the rest of
the bits.

Peace and Grace,

Thanks Gregory, a very imformative post. I'll look into CSS Friendly
Control Adapters...but it's a major clue that at least as far as
released asp.net controls go, table based markup comes with the turf to
some degree.

 

[James Irvine]

But not its height... Even on a 24" monitor I had to scroll to see the
bottom menu / copyright notice...

thanks -I hadn't even noticed : )

Calling a javascript function from the Master page code-behind, to
dynamically adjust the <div> height seems to do the trick:


protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)

{

// Get a ClientScriptManager reference from the Page class.

ClientScriptManager cs = Page.ClientScript;

if (!IsPostBack) // first pass:

{

switch (Convert.ToString(this.Page))

{

case "ASP.default_aspx":

LinkButton3.Visible = false;



cs.RegisterStartupScript

(GetType(), "Javascript", "javascript: fnSetLeftColumn(550); ", true);

break;

case "ASP.books_aspx":

LinkButton4.Visible = false;

cs.RegisterStartupScript

(GetType(), "Javascript", "javascript: fnSetLeftColumn(1550); ", true);

break;

case "ASP.booksf_aspx":

LinkButton4.Visible = false;

cs.RegisterStartupScript

(GetType(), "Javascript", "javascript: fnSetLeftColumn(1550); ", true);

break;

etc....

 

[Hillbilly]

Its Google's response http://code.google.com/p/blueprintcss/

Personally, I have favored Yahoo YUI CSS but it is more difficult to learn
as it is very succinct and terse which is why some have adopted lighter
frameworks such as the 960 CSS Framework which is faster and easier to use
for sites that you know will not need every possible layout such as YUI will
support.