CSS vs. tables

[Dave Thomas]

I am starting to learn how to code CSS vs using tables. I have used
tables for many years, and can do just about anything with them. However
I can see how CSS is more flexible and compact (and seems like more and
more people are using it).

I have done a few tutorials on the web for CSS and am catching on. But I
have a couple basic questions.

With tables, I used to be able to have a table with 2 columns, for
instance like a form:

username | <form goes here>
Your Real Name | <form goes here>

I wouldn't want to wrap the left column at all. I could do a table with
the first column 1% and the other column 99%, and a nowrap in the first
column. This worked perfect.

I can't seem to duplicate that effect with CSS using DIV's. I can adjust
the percentages so that it doesn't wrap, but if a user increases the
font size then it will wrap. With the old table method, if a user
increased the font size it didn't matter.

The rows seem independent of eachother, the only thing in common is they
are of the same class, so they have the same width percentage. besides
that, it doesn't look like they are "attached", meaning if one row has a
long sentence the other rows don't care.

Sorry to be so confusing! hopefully someone can help.

[Mason A. Clark]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 15:53:27 -0400, Dave Thomas <ge****@hotmail.com> wrote:

I am starting to learn how to code CSS vs using tables. I have used
tables for many years, and can do just about anything with them. However
I can see how CSS is more flexible and compact (and seems like more and
more people are using it).

I have done a few tutorials on the web for CSS and am catching on. But I
have a couple basic questions.

With tables, I used to be able to have a table with 2 columns, for
instance like a form:

username | <form goes here>
Your Real Name | <form goes here>

I wouldn't want to wrap the left column at all. I could do a table with
the first column 1% and the other column 99%, and a nowrap in the first
column. This worked perfect.

I can't seem to duplicate that effect with CSS using DIV's. I can adjust
the percentages so that it doesn't wrap, but if a user increases the
font size then it will wrap. With the old table method, if a user
increased the font size it didn't matter.

The rows seem independent of eachother, the only thing in common is they
are of the same class, so they have the same width percentage. besides
that, it doesn't look like they are "attached", meaning if one row has a
long sentence the other rows don't care.

Sorry to be so confusing! hopefully someone can help.

I frequently use Opera's quick button to reveal page structure -- by replacing
the page style with my own with table borders and my own link style.
(This is often necessary to make the page readable and reveal the links -- a
comment on "fancy" page design -- another subject another day.)

I've learned that the vast majority (95%) of pages, including very *significant*
pages are structured by means of *tables* with css to make them pretty and
facilitate design editing.

Based on this fact and my experience trying to achieve my page structure
with css, my conclusion is that *all* page structure should be done with
tables. Once the layout is established, css is very useful -- almost
essential if a site has many pages as mine does.

The reason is that css is a failed attempt to separate layout from content.
In due course it will be replaced by a stable, simpler method. For the
present the difficulties in achieving a stable many-browser layout are too
great.

This is an unpopular view here on the css group.

Mason C ( I will not respond to flames.)

Obligatory link: http://masonc.home.netcom.com

[Jim Moe]

Dave Thomas wrote:

With tables, I used to have a table with 2 columns, for
instance like a form:

username | <form goes here>
Your Real Name | <form goes here>
Tables are for tabular data. Defining "tabular" can get a little
tricky. IMO input forms as you show above are tabular.
I wouldn't want to wrap the left column at all. I could do a table with
the first column 1% and the other column 99%, and a nowrap in the first
column. This worked perfectly.

And it is an appropriate use of a table.
CSS is much more powerful when it does the layout; tables in retrospect
are an obviously inflexible and verbose method for layout.
Have you looked at the CSS Zen Garden? <http://www.csszengarden.com/>
It is amazing what can be done with CSS. All of the sample layouts use the
*same* HTML.

--
jmm dash list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

['sNiek]

Take a look at: http://jeffhowden.com/code/css/forms/ it uses the
<label>-tag for positioning the ields in the way you would like to.
Maybe you have to add "white-space: nowrap" somewhere.

Good luck!

--
Niek Emmen, Sitebouwer

Sebastian Webprojecten
Poststraat 68
5038 DH Tilburg
t 013 518 61 20
f 013 518 61 21
i http://www.sebastian.nl

[Barbara de Zoete]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 08:49:09 +0200, 'sNiek <n.*****@sebastian.nl> wrote:

Take a look at:

I seem to spot somehow that you are serious about trying to go with the
conventions in a group like this one. Your sig is properly separated, you use a
newsclient and not Google. And so on.

So, I'm going to be friendly about this, only once more:
Please _quote_ the text you reply to and attribute the quote.

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'

['sNiek]

Barbara de Zoete schreef:

So, I'm going to be friendly about this, only once more:
Please _quote_ the text you reply to and attribute the quote.

Is it necessary to quote the entire article when I give an answer to the
entire article? I just wanted to post a quick reply...
--
Niek Emmen, Sitebuilder
Sebastian Webprojecten, http://www.sebastian.nl

[Barbara de Zoete]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:12:50 +0200, 'sNiek <n.*****@sebastian.nl> wrote:

Is it necessary to quote the entire article when I give an answer to the
entire article? I just wanted to post a quick reply...

At first it is hard to spot what one can delete and what is supposed to be left
in. It doesn't always 'feel good' to just hack away parts of other peoples
messages. More over there is not a general rule that says how large a proportion
of the post you follow up to is supposed to get quoted.

If you are in doubt what is supposed to be left in, you can summarise a message
and place it between [ ... ] In the beginning it is better to leave in too much
than to just not quote anything IMO, because in that way you at least provide a
follow-up that will be understood by other readers.

You'll get the hang of it. It's likely that especially in the beginning people
will sometimes tell you 'you've left in too much' or just the opposite 'you've
taken out too much'. Never mind that. Just try, and train while you fight. :-)
Just remember that bad remarks are always just about your post and never about
you. A compliment on the other hand is all about you of course :-D

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'

['sNiek]

Barbara de Zoete schreef:

You'll get the hang of it.

Sure I will, i just learned that Sigs shouldn't really have more than 4
lines... :-)
--
Niek Emmen, Sitebuilder
Sebastian Webprojecten, http://www.sebastian.nl

[Barbara de Zoete]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:29:10 +0200, 'sNiek <n.*****@sebastian.nl> wrote:

Barbara de Zoete schreef:

You'll get the hang of it.

This looks like a proper quote to me.
Sure I will, i just learned that Sigs shouldn't really have more than 4
lines... :-)

Please, don't remind me ;-)
--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'

[Christian Kirsch]

'sNiek wrote:

Barbara de Zoete schreef:

So, I'm going to be friendly about this, only once more:
Please _quote_ the text you reply to and attribute the quote.

Is it necessary to quote the entire article when I give an answer to the
entire article? I just wanted to post a quick reply...

It is necessary to quote those lines you're responding to. Otherwise you
require the readers to follow the whole thread just to be able to
understand your posting.

Isn't that obvious?

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, 'sNiek wrote:

(about netiquette)

Is it necessary to quote the entire article
Almost never, I'd say...
when I give an answer to the entire article?
Give the attribution, and quote just a few significant lines which set
the context for your reply, as a courtesy to everyone else who's
following the thread. Exceptionally and rarely, if the whole article
really seems relevant, one may summarise it briefly in one's own words
(e.g in brackets [....] ) instead of quoting the whole original
article. The important thing is that a reader should be encountering
some original material from you before they've seen, at worst, two or
three dozen lines of quoted material - in most cases much less.
I just wanted to post a quick reply...

If you become a regular usenaut, as I'm sure we all hope that you
will, you'll get to recognise the regular respondents, and see their
posting style. This group is basically no different in its
conventions than any of the other "big-8" usenet groups, so no-one's
asking for heroic measures - just "regular" netiquette.

Hope this helps.

['sNiek]

Alan J. Flavell schreef:

so no-one's
asking for heroic measures - just "regular" netiquette.

Alright, you've convinced me. Back to Dave Thomas' original question I
propose.

Thanx all for pointing out the correct etiquettes.
--
Niek Emmen, Sitebuilder
Sebastian Webprojecten, http://www.sebastian.nl

[Daniel Déchelotte]

Jim Moe a écrit :

Dave Thomas wrote:

With tables, I used to have a table with 2 columns, for
instance like a form:

username | <form goes here>
Your Real Name | <form goes here>

Tables are for tabular data. Defining "tabular" can get a little
tricky. IMO input forms as you show above are tabular.

My characterization of tabular data:

"Cell 2,2 is to cell 2,1 what cell 1,2 is to cell 1,1. Etc."

Your data qualifies, IMVHO and FWIW. :)

--
Daniel Déchelotte
http://yo.dan.free.fr/

[Matt Silberstein]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 11:12:30 +0200, in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets , 'sNiek
<n.*****@sebastian.nl> in <42******@news.interstroom.nl> wrote:

Alan J. Flavell schreef:

so no-one's
asking for heroic measures - just "regular" netiquette.

Alright, you've convinced me. Back to Dave Thomas' original question I
propose.

Thanx all for pointing out the correct etiquettes.

What? No flames? No insults? What is the Usenet coming to.
<head shake>

<sigh \>

Kids these days.

<\head shake>

--
Matt Silberstein

Well ya see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers.

Cliff on Cheers

['sNiek]

Matt Silberstein schreef:

What? No flames? No insults? What is the Usenet coming to.
<head shake>

<sigh \>

Kids these days.

I'm not a kid, my kids are :-)
--
Niek Emmen, Sitebuilder
Sebastian Webprojecten, http://www.sebastian.nl

[Andreas Prilop]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Dave Thomas wrote:

I am starting to learn how to code CSS vs using tables. ^^ [...]
Sorry to be so confusing!

Confused are the simpletons who tell you that CSS and tables
are alternatives.

[Jim Moe]

Andreas Prilop wrote:

Confused are the simpletons who tell you that CSS and tables
are alternatives.

Please expand on your statement about alternatives.

--
jmm dash list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

[Martin Bialasinski]

Jim Moe <jm***************@sohnen-moe.com> wrote:

Andreas Prilop wrote:

Confused are the simpletons who tell you that CSS and tables
are alternatives.

Please expand on your statement about alternatives.

He meant to say "mutually exclusive", I believe.

Bye,
Martin

[Andreas Prilop]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Martin Bialasinski wrote:

Confused are the simpletons who tell you that CSS and tables
are alternatives.

Please expand on your statement about alternatives.

He meant to say "mutually exclusive", I believe.

That's what "alternative" means - in my understanding of the
English language.