3 ms·

> Related: I also love when I can't paste tabular data into Excel/etc. anymore Except that’s exactly where tables should be used. So if you can’t, someone has

> Related: I also love when I can't paste tabular data into Excel/etc. anymore Except that’s exactly where tables should be used. So if you can’t, someone has really misunderstood CSS. Use it for tables, not for layout.

wanderingstan 11mo ago
I’ve gotten in several arguments over the years where webdevs insisted on showing tabular data using flexbox or hardcoded div widths or worse. They insisted that html tables were never ever to be used and couldn’t be persuaded.
- MrJohz 11mo ago
  In fairness, the default `display: table` setup is often a pain to work with, so I can understand why people would opt for flexbox instead. One better option, though, might be to use `table` elements under the hood, styled with `display: grid` (and judicious use of subgrid for the intermediate elements) to get more precise control over the layout, while still using the right semantic elements underneath.
- idbehold 11mo ago
  If you try to render tables with millions of cells the browser does a really poor job and the performance is abysmal. The only solution when you need to render that many cells is to virtualize the table and only have the visible cells (plus some buffer) actually in the DOM at a time. That plus weird restrictions browsers put on certain table elements (looking at you thead) that prevent them from being "sticky" headers means that the developer is left with absolutely positioned divs as the only solution. Blame browser vendors for not providing a native way to present tabular data with more than a few hundred thousand rows without causing performance issues.
  - pornel 11mo ago
    there's table-layout:fixed that makes rendering of large tables much faster. I'd argue that if you have so many rows that DOM can't handle, humans won't either. Then you need search, filtering, data exports, not JS attaching a faked scrollbar to millions of rows.
- pornel 11mo ago
  They are wrong, and didn't get the point of separating semantics and presentation.
Rendello 11mo ago
I agree, but it is funny to me that your Hacker News comment is itself a table. It's in the same vein as "don't freak out, but there's a spooky skeleton inside you!"

wanderingstan 11mo ago

I’ve gotten in several arguments over the years where webdevs insisted on showing tabular data using flexbox or hardcoded div widths or worse. They insisted that html tables were never ever to be used and couldn’t be persuaded.

MrJohz 11mo ago
In fairness, the default `display: table` setup is often a pain to work with, so I can understand why people would opt for flexbox instead. One better option, though, might be to use `table` elements under the hood, styled with `display: grid` (and judicious use of subgrid for the intermediate elements) to get more precise control over the layout, while still using the right semantic elements underneath.
idbehold 11mo ago
If you try to render tables with millions of cells the browser does a really poor job and the performance is abysmal. The only solution when you need to render that many cells is to virtualize the table and only have the visible cells (plus some buffer) actually in the DOM at a time. That plus weird restrictions browsers put on certain table elements (looking at you thead) that prevent them from being "sticky" headers means that the developer is left with absolutely positioned divs as the only solution. Blame browser vendors for not providing a native way to present tabular data with more than a few hundred thousand rows without causing performance issues.
- pornel 11mo ago
  there's table-layout:fixed that makes rendering of large tables much faster. I'd argue that if you have so many rows that DOM can't handle, humans won't either. Then you need search, filtering, data exports, not JS attaching a faked scrollbar to millions of rows.
pornel 11mo ago
They are wrong, and didn't get the point of separating semantics and presentation.

Rendello 11mo ago

I agree, but it is funny to me that your Hacker News comment is itself a table. It's in the same vein as "don't freak out, but there's a spooky skeleton inside you!"