IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / Internet Forum / I don't think that's the issue
Post #53,342
by tseliot
Picture of tseliot
9/26/02 12:03:01 PM
Reply
New I don't think that's the issue
There is a lot of of tabular data in this world. If you aren't supposed to use tables to display it, then what should you use?


I don't know any CSS gurus (or their fawning acolytes) who think tabular data shouldn't be displayed in tables. The issue is non-tabular data being "boxed into place" by an invisible grid made from an HTML table. IOW, they intend the HTML table element to implement the concept of tabular data like you say, and not implement the concept of fixed placement in a grid; the two concepts are distinct. The only "purity" involved is wanting the second concept to have its own implementation, separate from the first.
Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance -
Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation.
BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
Post #53,413
by ben_tilly
9/26/02 8:32:21 PM
Reply
New But it is
When you cannot conveniently distribute display information across tables, columns, and arrays, there is a need to repeat information in each td.

Which gets us into the situation that I dislike.

Cheers,
Ben
"Career politicians are inherently untrustworthy; if it spends its life buzzing around the outhouse, it\ufffds probably a fly."
- [link|http://www.nationalinterest.org/issues/58/Mead.html|Walter Mead]
     Question re: CSS and tables - (drewk) - (20) - Sept. 24, 2002, 12:48:56 PM EDT
         That's the way it used to be... - (ChrisR) - (11) - Sept. 24, 2002, 03:54:23 PM EDT
             That would be stupid - (drewk) - (10) - Sept. 24, 2002, 04:47:59 PM EDT
                 Tables are the poor man's layout control - (ChrisR) - (9) - Sept. 24, 2002, 05:06:43 PM EDT
                     Not really - (drewk) - Sept. 24, 2002, 05:27:13 PM EDT
                     Like most purists then... - (ben_tilly) - (7) - Sept. 24, 2002, 08:19:03 PM EDT
                         Damnit, Ben... - (inthane-chan) - (4) - Sept. 25, 2002, 04:09:01 PM EDT
                             Oh yeah - (drewk) - (3) - Sept. 25, 2002, 04:40:42 PM EDT
                                 /me pagefaults. - (inthane-chan) - Sept. 25, 2002, 05:03:12 PM EDT
                                 Aren't you thinking of div tags? - (ben_tilly) - (1) - Sept. 25, 2002, 06:40:12 PM EDT
                                     Hmm, I think that would be an implementation issue - (drewk) - Sept. 26, 2002, 08:53:01 AM EDT
                         I don't think that's the issue - (tseliot) - (1) - Sept. 26, 2002, 12:03:01 PM EDT
                             But it is - (ben_tilly) - Sept. 26, 2002, 08:32:21 PM EDT
         Seems to work - (ChrisR) - (1) - Sept. 24, 2002, 09:13:50 PM EDT
             D'oh! Guess what? - (drewk) - Sept. 25, 2002, 09:27:00 AM EDT
         That's how it has been implemented. - (static) - Sept. 25, 2002, 02:25:12 AM EDT
         If you target newer browsers: - (tseliot) - (4) - Sept. 25, 2002, 12:46:59 PM EDT
             Thak you thank you thank you thank you thank you - (drewk) - (3) - Sept. 25, 2002, 01:03:36 PM EDT
                 W3C's CSS spec.... - (kmself) - (1) - Sept. 25, 2002, 01:20:09 PM EDT
                     Thanks____________and ... gaaah, that's dense reading -NT - (drewk) - Sept. 25, 2002, 02:23:34 PM EDT
                 CSS2 + Eric Meyer aka God - (tseliot) - Sept. 26, 2002, 11:56:45 AM EDT

And don't forget the fire ants.
95 ms