3 ms·
Perhaps we were unclear. Coding layouts in tables is coding towards appearance rather than meaning, hence the problems you described.
by compay 15y ago
Perhaps we were unclear. Coding layouts in tables is coding towards appearance rather than meaning, hence the problems you described.
- smacktoward 15y agoNo, you weren't unclear, you just completely missed my point. Coding layouts in tables is more than just "coding towards appearance." It is misusing a non-appearance-related element, which is worse. The problems I described don't come from "coding towards appearance," and they aren't encountered with DIVs named presentationally rather than semantically. You only get them with tables, because you're abusing the table element by using it in ways that are completely orthogonal to its purpose. I'm not disagreeing that semantically-named DIVs are better than presentationally-named DIVs. What I'm saying is that presentationally-named DIVs are not equivalent to table-based layouts. Table-based layouts are worse than ANY DIV-based layout, regardless of how the DIVs are named.