Form - Tables, Lists or Divs?

[shapper]

Hello,

I am designing a big form and I have been seen a lot of options for
the layout.

For grouping most versions use fieldset which makes sense if that's
purpose of fieldset.

For layout I have seen:

- Tables
- Lists
- Divs

Which approach do you think is advisable to use?

I created one with an ordered list ... The problem with lists is that
the CSS becomes really complex.
But I have seen a lot of examples of this ... not all correct.

In this case I am planning a two columns form.
But I would like also an global feedback on this.

Thanks,
Miguel

 

[rf]

Hello,

I am designing a big form and I have been seen a lot of options for
the layout.

For grouping most versions use fieldset which makes sense if that's
purpose of fieldset.

For layout I have seen:

- Tables
- Lists
- Divs

Which approach do you think is advisable to use?

I created one with an ordered list ... The problem with lists is that
the CSS becomes really complex.
But I have seen a lot of examples of this ... not all correct.

In this case I am planning a two columns form.
But I would like also an global feedback on this.

Didn't dorayme tell you elsewhere? Use a table, it's tabular data. Columns
and rows.

 

[John Hosking]

shapper wrote:

Didn't dorayme tell you elsewhere? Use a table, it's tabular data. Columns
and rows.

Yes, but our brother Miguel...
.... doesn't seem to have mastered basic Usenet concepts of netiquette
regarding multi-posting, quoting, trimming, attributing, etc., even
after all this time.
.... doesn't seem to lurk here and read posts from other people; I think
he only visits to post his own questions.
.... doesn't seem to remember what he's read.

<c7221159-1753-4c5f-9faa-e1bbacd3758a@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>

 

[shapper]

Yes, but our brother Miguel...
... doesn't seem to have mastered basic Usenet concepts of netiquette
regarding multi-posting, quoting, trimming, attributing, etc., even
after all this time.

I posted here because if the talk was going from CSS to HTML Semantics
I thought I should start a topic here.

I thought that it were two different communities ... for two different
subjects.

I didn't know I was breaking a rule on this.

Thanks,
Miguel

 

[Andy Dingley]

I am designing a big form and I have been seen a lot of options for
the layout.

<form> or display-only data doesn't make much difference. It's much
more about the layout you're after.

If you want "grid" (i.e. 2-dimensions that maintain a robust 2-d
layout regardless of window size or scrolling), then <table>s are the
way to go.

What's often better though is to bundle up small units of the form
into "boxes", layout the content within the boxes by some fairly rigid
means (maybe <table>), but then fluidly flow the boxes into some
broader container.

You might also have three (or more or less) of these "containers" and
set those up quite rigidly as left or right sub-columns. This can work
well, especially when you're switching your "boxes" in dynamically
through some sort of user-selectable toolbars mechanism.


Overall though, you probably want to be looking at an application
framework like JSF / RichFaces if things have got to this level of
complexity.

 

[Johannes Hafner]

I posted here because if the talk was going from CSS to HTML Semantics
I thought I should start a topic here.

Not wrong in general. But there is no need to re-post questions, wich
have already been answered.

I thought that it were two different communities ... for two different
subjects.

No communities at all - "usegroup" it's called

Johannes

 

[dorayme]

<c7221159-1753-4c5f-9faa-e1bbacd3758a@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>

When I clicked this, it opened in my newsreader. I was expecting to go
to GG thread in my browser? I was interested in how you made this link
so that - pleasantly surprising - it opened in my newsreader. My
MT-NewsWatcher is not usually so approachable. I don't think I have ever
yet clicked a link that has opened a post in my newsreader.

(This may be something I just missed like I thought blondes were dark
hair and brunettes light till I was about 10 years old. Buggered if I
know how this happened. Sheltered life? I bet everyone has some *big*
misunderstanding in their past. This is my *only* one, so wipe the smile
off your faces)

 

[dorayme]

I posted here because if the talk was going from CSS to HTML Semantics
I thought I should start a topic here.

I thought that it were two different communities ... for two different
subjects.

I didn't know I was breaking a rule on this.

No, it is a bit like in a film I saw once where the townsfolk were
trying to convince a rich organization (Govt or businessman?) that their
town qualified for a large grant of money and services. They had to have
a certain number of people in the town and they did not.

So when the delegation of inspection arrived at the town, the townsfolk
organised to put on an appearance. They would show the people in a
church. And while they took the delegation to another hall (by a long
indirect route), the people in the church would rush quietly out the
back of the church and go to the hall by a direct route and be there for
the delegation to see.

(David Segal, any recall of this film's name?)

 

[dorayme]

I thought that it were two different communities ... for two different
subjects.

No communities at all - "usegroup" it's called [/QUOTE]

In other words, when it comes to our funerals, we should not expect
anyone from these groups. I do think special arrangements could be made
though. I have discussed this with local religious leaders and they are
skeptical about my idea of grave-side or oven internet connected screens
with webcams...

 

[Johannes Hafner]

When I clicked this, it opened in my newsreader.

What a suprise - it's not a URL, it's a message-id

I was expecting to go
to GG thread in my browser?

You would went there, if the link had been this one:

I was interested in how you made this link

Guess he looked up the Message-ID (I would say in the message headers),
put it in angle bracktes and posted it.
Your newsreader interpreted it correctly and converted it into a link.

Johannes

 

[dorayme]

....
Guess he looked up the Message-ID (I would say in the message headers),
put it in angle bracktes and posted it.
Your newsreader interpreted it correctly and converted it into a link.

OK. I will look into message headers in future to identify posts.

Generally, I have thought it rude to look into headers as it feels like
prying into personal information... <g>