Sure, a change does require education. Where we differ is that I do not agree that pure CSS layouts are always the "best" solution. The "best" solution takes

Sure, a change does require education. Where we differ is that I do not agree that pure CSS layouts are always the "best" solution. The "best" solution takes programmer familiarity, style, languages, business case, time lines, budgets, etc., as inputs. And I'm tired of people telling me how I ought to program. It's generally well intentioned folks who have an idealistic theory (it's easier to modify! scrapers can access it more easily! it allows disabled people easier access!) pushed into a half-ass solution. Yes, I find the CSS2 standard half-assed. For me, it boils down to what I can produce. I have much more flexibility (I can only get CSS to work "right" with certain types of layouts; tables, I can do anything) and am more productive with table based layouts. Perhaps I'll run into a situation where a light bulb clicks on, and I go "Ohhhh, it would've sure been nice if I'd used CSS for layouts here!" But, up until now, I have only ever had the experience of "Fuck, I sure wish I had put this into a table rather than a CSS layout." I've read several of the highly recommended CSS type books (Meyer, a list apart, etc.) I've tried to apply the lessons. I've spent more effort trying to figure out CSS than any single other technology I use. Maybe going to a class would help, or having 1-1 tutoring / peer sessions, but that's not in the cards for the future. So instead, I just pathetically create sites that I love (and are successful, for me) with less frustration, faster, using table layouts. YMMV.