4 ms·
> because it kinda does the "right thing" in many cases, but it's actually ill-defined, varies between browsers, and has only a work-in-progress spec Which is
by mgkimsal 12y ago
> because it kinda does the "right thing" in many cases, but it's actually ill-defined, varies between browsers, and has only a work-in-progress spec
Which is completely not like using CSS at all, right?
- pcwalton 12y agoLike I said, I've implemented both. CSS 2.1 was much easier than tables. Almost everything I implemented in CSS 2.1 made sense (with some notable exceptions, such as the hypothetical box, margin collapse, and border collapse). Tables were nonstop backwards compatibility hacks.