programimi.com — In no particular order 55 reasons for me to do “tableless” websites using valid XHTML for markup, CSS for layout and Flash sparingly, only as an ingredient. By tableless I mean avoiding tables (or a tagsoup of unnecessary divs substituting table trs and tds) for layout purposes and aiming towards as semantic markup as possible...
Sep 16, 2007 View in Crawl 4
infocydeSep 17, 2007
No way man, tables just get things done sometimes and they are cross browser compatible. I don't necessarily want write 10 divs just to get something to line up right, especially when I'm try to do a cross browser vertical align or something like that on a page. People who get adamant about the non use of tables I just don't get. I'm not anti CSS or anti XHTML, I'm just anti non-critical thinking. Come on people, does it really matter? Does the end user care?
digitaleliteSep 17, 2007
i believe this is a better website : <a class="user" href="http://www.linkinn.com/">http://www.linkinn.com/</a>
devlindSep 17, 2007
Agreed, thanks for saying that. I thought I was the only one who still thought tables were the most resilient way of displaying information in a tabular format.Digg for you!!
alanmarchmanSep 17, 2007
This article was here first:<a class="user" href="http://www.khmerang.com/index.php?p=106">http://www.khmerang.com/index.php?p=106</a>Ripoff?
texanpsychoSep 17, 2007
Gotta love the blinking/flashing banner right next to it.
syntaxisSep 18, 2007
Even today's pro's were once newbies to CSS, and they had their doubts, too, when they first fired up three different browsers to test their first CSS-page in. I certainly had doubts. But now, 3 years later, it's no contest. I don't have to test anymore to get my pages to work in Ie5.5, IE6, IE7, Firefox, Opera and Safari. I do test, of course, but I usually come to the conclusion that: "Hey, it works. Neat!"
mhmdkhamisDec 15, 2007
<a class="user" href="http://www.paramegsoft.com">http://www.paramegsoft.com</a>XHTML/CSS is still a very primitive, slow, and inconsistent way to buld websites. I'm very disappointed with how primitive the web still is. Ideally we'd have an authoriing tool that worked more like a combination of Flash/Dreamweaver and was an open format, easily spidered by the search engines."Semantic markup" is such a silly concern - this is something that should be automatic. The technology should drive proper usage. If you have to bully people into using something properly, then perhaps something is wrong with the technology tools available. Besides, many CSS layouts require JavaScript to dynamically resize elements, etc. - which to me is more of a hack than tables! Pick your poison - to me it's clear that the technology right now sucks either way. Sure, I go with XHTML+CSS these days, but I don't feel any better about it than tables.<a class="user" href="http://mobile.free-software.cc/">http://mobile.free-software.cc/</a>
forcez5Jan 8, 2008
I prefer to use a CMS software <a class="user" href="http://www.csalim.com">http://www.csalim.com</a><a class="user" href="http://www.basemyspace.com">http://www.basemyspace.com</a>
alragib059Feb 16, 2008
<a class="user" href="http://www.alragib.com/portal/">http://www.alragib.com/portal/</a><a class="user" href="http://www.alragib.com/forums/">http://www.alragib.com/forums/</a>
xboxdesignJul 29, 2008
I like it it's too good<a class="user" href="http://xboxdesign.com">http://xboxdesign.com</a><a class="user" href="http://www.zeniltuo.com/">http://www.zeniltuo.com/</a><a class="user" href="http://www.iconlook.com/">http://www.iconlook.com/</a><a class="user" href="http://www.pixellogo.com/">http://www.pixellogo.com/</a>lokendra(web designer)