3 ms·

I've felt that way many times. I use CSS but I don't like it. Tables are quick and dirty and sometimes quick and dirty is all that matters. Would you rather

I've felt that way many times. I use CSS but I don't like it. Tables are quick and dirty and sometimes quick and dirty is all that matters. Would you rather have this guy working on his website all day or making an NES emulator? I believe the fellow that made this site (news.y) had something to say about CSS and Tables and which one wins in the RAD department.

olavk 18y ago
CSS is almost always quicker, easier and more powerful than equivalent presentational markup. The problem with tables is that Internet Explores does not support the "dislay:table" property, which is the CSS equivalent to table layout. So if you want a certain kind of grid-like layout and you want to support Internet Explorer, you have to choose: 1) either emulate the layout using CSS constructs which were not designed for this purpose. 2) use tables However this is not a shortcoming of CSS, it is a shortcoming of Internet Explorer. display:table has been part of the CSS standard for 10 years. I wrote an article http://olav.dk/articles/tables.html http://olav.dk/articles/tables.html to describe the specific context where it makes sense to use tables rather than CSS. In all other cases, CSS is better.