When are deprecated HTML Tables finally gonna die?

[Isofarro]

I copied the code from google.com showing how the world's number one
website uses tables:

I looked at the source from news.com.com - CNet - the world's biggest online
news website. And they don't misuse tables.

Heck. Even the second biggest news website in the world Wired.com isn't
using tables for layout.

Must be a reason for that.

 

[Toby A Inkster]

And obviously there's next to no [CSS]
support at all in legacy browsers.

Some people think it's OK to just drop users of those browsers

Just hide CSS from legacy browsers. You're still supporting them, they
just see an unstyled version of the site.

 

[EightNineThree]

"EightNineThree" <[email protected]> wrote in

I hear this anti-table comment often, but I fail to understand it. I
assume people refer to CSS replacing tables, but CSS seems incapable
of handling nested tables presentations and the ease of writing
tables.

I copied the code from google.com showing how the world's number one
website uses tables:

The above logical fallacy comes to you from a guy whose site is
http://www.logicians.com

 

[Matthias Gutfeldt]

I looked at the source from news.com.com - CNet - the world's biggest online
news website. And they don't misuse tables.

He, he, he - they just changed it two days ago. And of course it doesn't
validate, like espn.com. Bad example.

Heck. Even the second biggest news website in the world Wired.com isn't
using tables for layout.

Wired, on the other hand, does validate (apart from the occasional
glitches).


Matthias

 

[Matthias Gutfeldt]

And obviously there's next to no [CSS]
support at all in legacy browsers.

Some people think it's OK to just drop users of those browsers

Just hide CSS from legacy browsers. You're still supporting them,
they just see an unstyled version of the site.

In an University setting with a solid userbase for Opera 4, NN 4, IEX4,
and other antiques ? I don't think so.


Matthias

 

[kchayka]

I hear this anti-table comment often, but I fail to understand it. I
assume people refer to CSS replacing tables, but CSS seems incapable
of handling nested tables presentations and the ease of writing
tables.

Layout tables are only an "easy" way to design if you use a so-called
WYSIWYG editor that generates the code for you. They are a big PITA if
you hand-code. Besides, without the kludgery of layout tables, a site
is actually much easier to maintain and can reach a wider audience.

BTW, there isn't anything at either of your sites (urls gleaned from
your email address) that couldn't be done with CSS fairly easily.
Tables shouldn't be needed at all, let alone nested ones.

 

[Dylan Parry]

In an University setting with a solid userbase for Opera 4, NN 4, IEX4,
and other antiques ? I don't think so.

You'd be surprised. Even out in the sticks (Bangor, Wales) the University
has upgraded all systems to IE6 and Netscape 7.

 

[Matthias Gutfeldt]

Matthias Gutfeldt wrote:




You'd be surprised. Even out in the sticks (Bangor, Wales) the University
has upgraded all systems to IE6 and Netscape 7.

The "official" browser here is IE6. But every department is a small
kingdom that does pretty much what it wants, not just in IT.


Matthias

 

[Isofarro]

He, he, he - they just changed it two days ago. And of course it doesn't
validate, like espn.com.

Neither does google.com.

 

[Matthias Gutfeldt]

Matthias Gutfeldt wrote:




Neither does google.com.

Of course not! They're the evil bad guys with tables layout, remember?

But unlike news.com.com, they don't even claim to be using any
particular HTML version, so at least they're honest about it.

Decorating non-valid garbage with an XHTML Doctype sends entirely the
wrong message to the people in high places we're trying to convince of
the importance of standards.


Matthias

 

[Trevor]

The above logical fallacy comes to you from a guy whose site is
http://www.logicians.com

Logicians.com is not developed much, my time is used in commercial
sites which actually make money. But my long term interests are in
logical aspects of technology. I hope to develop something in
multimedia later using 3D and control systems.

Logicians (the people) have an interesting history, many were
philosophers. I was motivated by the name after reading a book on
logicians in Ancient Greece.

 

[Trevor]

Layout tables are only an "easy" way to design if you use a so-called
WYSIWYG editor that generates the code for you. They are a big PITA if
you hand-code. Besides, without the kludgery of layout tables, a site
is actually much easier to maintain and can reach a wider audience.

BTW, there isn't anything at either of your sites (urls gleaned from
your email address) that couldn't be done with CSS fairly easily.
Tables shouldn't be needed at all, let alone nested ones.

The sites logicians.com etc were all developed during 1999 in my spare
time and not much since then on them. I first used the Internet in
1993 as a postgraduate, but in 1999 I started writing my own sites
after the boom started in the US.

I have worked on customer work and now my own e-commerce site at
merrows.com which is only a few weeks old.