sitepoint.com— To create mind boggling web design. Here is a well written tutorial outlining how you can combine CSS skills and Photoshop skills
Aug 10, 2005View in Crawl 4
You shouldn't need a book to tell you how to do that. But, frankly, you shouldn't even do that anyway. Tables work amazingly well, and work in a liquid environment far better than CSS does - at least by current standards. Blame it on IE, but until the world's most popular browser actually supports the true standard, designers need to focus on what works. Not the best case scenario.Anyway, this link is a big, fat, "meh." If you've done this sort of thing for more than a month, you should know this kinda' stuff. The tutorial is bad, and the little girl trying to teach grown-ups web design needs to just go home. The grown-ups are here. Go back to the kiddie pool.
Pretty good reference site. I personally prefer <a class="user" href="http://www.htmldog.com/">http://www.htmldog.com/</a> myself but maybe that's just me. I check on zengarden all the time rhyno2000. The amount of creativity flowing through that site makes my brain hurt. How do they do that stuff?
But what you're saying is a matter of opinion. Because you believe that creating a myriad of stylesheets, employing browserchecks and 60 different classes is superior to creating one page with a strong table structure doesn't make it so.The argument that tables shouldn't be used for content display is made erroneous by how well they work. And always, table structure continues to work in antiquated browsers, on other platforms, with little to no problems. A well written, well commented table is easy to understand, easy to build, and works without a problem. I'd rather build a page with a series of tables in 20 mintues than spend 4 hours creating 4 style sheets, browser checking and praying, worrying about the different implementations of how IE vs Opera vs Safari will interpret what "top:15px" means.The biggest secret to good web design isn't css...it's blank.gif :D
I have to back the tuna on this. CSS is ideal, but in practical terms it simply doesn't behave as expected in all browsers. Tables stay where I put them, even if I have to resort to the ridiculous step of using shims/spacers to force it into shape.I design first, code second. Usability is determined by layout & design, then ENABLED by code. CSS helps me control many aspects, and I love what it allows me to do.Each to his own. If you're designing a blog or personal site entirely in CSS, great. But I've yet to see a major B2B site abandon the predictability of tables for an all-CSS design. And with IE7 not being compliant (why the hell do we act surprised by that news) I doubt my workflow will change much. Which is sad, because CSS has so much promise!
analogue40Aug 10, 2005
nice digg, i just bought site point's 'Designing without tables using CSS' too, good book.
bleutunaAug 10, 2005
You shouldn't need a book to tell you how to do that. But, frankly, you shouldn't even do that anyway. Tables work amazingly well, and work in a liquid environment far better than CSS does - at least by current standards. Blame it on IE, but until the world's most popular browser actually supports the true standard, designers need to focus on what works. Not the best case scenario.Anyway, this link is a big, fat, "meh." If you've done this sort of thing for more than a month, you should know this kinda' stuff. The tutorial is bad, and the little girl trying to teach grown-ups web design needs to just go home. The grown-ups are here. Go back to the kiddie pool.
gookieAug 10, 2005
this digg title is definitely overstated.
wnathansAug 10, 2005
Pretty good reference site. I personally prefer <a class="user" href="http://www.htmldog.com/">http://www.htmldog.com/</a> myself but maybe that's just me. I check on zengarden all the time rhyno2000. The amount of creativity flowing through that site makes my brain hurt. How do they do that stuff?
ahmerhussainAug 10, 2005
I hope that IE7 is standards compliant....
bleutunaAug 11, 2005
But what you're saying is a matter of opinion. Because you believe that creating a myriad of stylesheets, employing browserchecks and 60 different classes is superior to creating one page with a strong table structure doesn't make it so.The argument that tables shouldn't be used for content display is made erroneous by how well they work. And always, table structure continues to work in antiquated browsers, on other platforms, with little to no problems. A well written, well commented table is easy to understand, easy to build, and works without a problem. I'd rather build a page with a series of tables in 20 mintues than spend 4 hours creating 4 style sheets, browser checking and praying, worrying about the different implementations of how IE vs Opera vs Safari will interpret what "top:15px" means.The biggest secret to good web design isn't css...it's blank.gif :D
einsteindesignAug 11, 2005
I have to back the tuna on this. CSS is ideal, but in practical terms it simply doesn't behave as expected in all browsers. Tables stay where I put them, even if I have to resort to the ridiculous step of using shims/spacers to force it into shape.I design first, code second. Usability is determined by layout & design, then ENABLED by code. CSS helps me control many aspects, and I love what it allows me to do.Each to his own. If you're designing a blog or personal site entirely in CSS, great. But I've yet to see a major B2B site abandon the predictability of tables for an all-CSS design. And with IE7 not being compliant (why the hell do we act surprised by that news) I doubt my workflow will change much. Which is sad, because CSS has so much promise!