The programing language world is complicated for non-developers and beginners. No technique is designed to be used in isolation. This site is simple and fantastic, thanks for making it easy to read your content. Maybe its because I learned with tables when I was getting started but Divs are complicated and they absolutely do require more code most of the time when you consider practically each object needs to be assigned an ID and go along with a class . HTML tables impose a more rigid structure on the content than a div. In order for a browser to render a page built with tables it needs to read the code on the page twice. Ive been using divs for a decade now and never once had to guess where the content would be. WebSome of the advantages and disadvantages of database forms are as follows: Advantages Data entry is less error-prone A number of predefined formats are available for use Usually, all the data fields for a single record appears in one screen Forms are customizable (compared to data sheet views) Forms can include instructions for data entry I wrote it to answer the question. I feel the same about maintain tables-based sites. People can build sites without using a table-based layout now and still do. As you can see I still strongly favor css layouts, but I think many of the arguments on either side of the debate get a little silly at times. They use less code. Id rather switch my page to tables, than screw around with IE. Use table-layout: fixed to create a I REALLY dont have any desire to fight that battle again. Ive been told I can create any design feasible with CSS, so I have offered the above URLs as examples you can either confirm or be dubious about relative to their successful conversion to CSS from tables. CSS has the impressive benefit of being consistent. It helps to form spontaneous and consistent changes. You said I made overhyped performance claims, which I didnt. Web designers needs to use few lines of programming for every page improving site speed. 4) Separation of Style and Content I guess this one is related #1, ease of updating? WebAdvantages of CSS3 CSS3 provides a consistent and precise positioning of navigable elements. Personally, if I could instantly convert a design into HTML, Id do it. Four-fifths of the way through an assessable project isnt the best time to have to redo a table-based layout. Let me start by letting you know I fall on the css side of things. Odds are pretty good that none of the people who wrote these posts are or were on the development teams that wrote the browser code. 3. A div is a more generic container that doesnt impose any structure on the content within. Of course that depends on the developer more than the code itself. Ive offered tutorials on the basic layout and Ive offered tutorials on things that can go inside that layout, but never all the code for an entire site. Its less-influenced by personal biases and emotions. With a div-based layout you could make this change in your stylesheet alone. Thats why this method is useful for testing or previewing the changes, and I have no great love for code. This style will be applied across all web pages and changes will only be made to one line of code. Yet every few months someone else pops in here to tell me why Im clueless and to argue in favor of table-based layout. it could also be your own code or more likely that your code and my code arent working well other. So, its important to ensure faster speed. If I throw out a website which has no padding or un symetrial or miss-aligned text I would be asked to start over. One must know these disadvantages so that he or she is aware and takes care of them while I feel like one of the reasons that tables are still so widely used are the WYSIWYGs. I coded up 3 different versions of the same page (divs, tables, tables with table-layout:fixed), and then ran some benchmarks on performance and file sizes. The same rules apply: only a situation where not using tables for layout damages the users experience will absolutely qualify css vs tables WRONG! There are many things you can say I do, but hype isnt one of them. That leads to easier maintenance, more freedom in design, and quicker load times. WebW3Schools offers free online tutorials, references and exercises in all the major languages of the web. I agree with you about seo. Some might argue that the content search engines see on the page is more important and through divs its easier to present a different order of content to visitors and search engine spiders. I will use them to learn more about CSS. Here is a link to an article with more detail. Even though browser compatibility is better (or supposed to be) with tables, the lack of flexibility when I inevitably changed my mind about the design meant I basically had to build the whole site again. I disagree about it being more code. CSS, CSS 2, CSS 3 are often quite confusing. The problems I run into are on updates: adding a few lines here, and changing the text there. My question to you is Why frame this debate in terms This guide helps you choose the right option for optimal performance and data safety. I think it makes them easier to move them around on a single page. divs vs tables RIGHT! 1) Easier Site-Wide Changes CSS proponents claim site-wide changes are easier with CSS because you change one file and boom, it changes on all pages. My biggest concern is if I can design the following website designs in CSS. Im simply adding another piece to it. It separates style from content (editable/un-editable). Why css layout over table layout? It sounds like Im being lumped in with other people who are making grand claims. Whats the difference? By using our site, you Again though you may notice in the post I dont use seo as a reason to use css. How to use CSS in different dimension (CSS-in-JS) ? Web3. As a web designer I spend the vast majority of my css time finding work around for IE and sometimes other browsers. The main goal (as a method sheet language) was to separate document content from document presentation, which incorporates style elements, like color, layout, and fonts. between the 2 techniques when in truth, there is little distinction to be made. What I will say though is that every person Ive ever met who was equally capable at using both css and tables chooses to use css. Cmon man! LOL, Im not advocating tables b/c they are infintesimally slower then divs. Tables also have distinct dis advantages on mobile devices: You can only squeeze in a small number of columns before the table width causes horizontal scrolling on smaller screens. Do a search for css vs tables or similar and you can find a lot out there. The only way its faster is for updating, but if you read correctly, I style my tables with CSS tags (div, id, class) so I am just as quick. This is what Dreamweaver template files do. Long Run Maintenance 5. w3c standards are useless 6. structure and content css vs tables round II. Out of curiosity did you read the post? If you click through on some of the links in the post or just do a search for css vs tables youll come across a lot of the reasoning why some prefer tables. Sure if in some Mexican sweat shop, 5 year olds were parsing pages for Google that may be true, but parsing text is as basic as programming gets other than typing hello world on the screenI really doubt thats an issue for Google, or Yahoo spider programmers. And then discover that I forgot a somewhere and nothing lines up with the adjacent cells. Thats not meant as a knock against you. Thats always going to be better done using css. However my make them spend more time parsing if you dont have. Generally you wouldnt be setting heights on most divs allowing them to expand and contract based on the text. An example of this lie is what proponents of divs like to show off by only having a few divs compared to a table structure, but in order to get even close to having the same properties as table we have to use something like the last example in http://www.vanseodesign.com/css/equal-height-columns/ as the others are just faking the appearance with a background image. Theres nothing wrong with how you got here. If youre so convinced tables are better than css then go ahead and use tables. Im not going to stop you. Appreciate it and I think this post being more recent is the more relevant one. Tables are still very useful for layout given that most sites are still essentially boxes that never move, but adjust in size as needed. Your text should reflow with changes. If you ever visited a page that showed nothing for a few seconds before everything suddenly appeared, that time was likely your browser making its first pass over the table structure behind the page. There is no format to follow for teaching the aesthetics of style most people, though, can- recognise something that follows a classical design. There are a lot of myths propagated by both sides in this debate, but once you cut through most of them the argument really boils down to a few things. Likewise I seem to see a lot of likewise ambiguous clamoring about the change that CSS brings with little reason to change. Columns of equal height? Home. The times when floating blocks are more appropriate to use, besides its original intended use of having text wrap around images, is specifically when the blocks are meant to be independent from one another. The advantages with using divs are essentially counter to the problems with tables described above. Maybe Ill apply changes to my test pages as my home page changes and track the time involved. The columns of a newspaper are used to guide the reader along the layout. Can you recommend several online tutorials on how to lay out a web page with divs, as well as with their accompanying css rule elements? Theres really no reason in my opinion to use floats on a horizontal list when the goal is to have the list elements cooperate rather than be independent blocks whose widths are determined by content and padding. I think grids are great, but I dont think you should create them using html tables for the reasons I mentioned in this post. I think tables were a great way to layout a website once upon a time. Global changes are easier: If youre using external styles, you make a change in one place and its automatically propagated to all the pages in the system. He takes a layout done in tables and works to change it to divs and css. http://www.taylor-graphics.net/eye_clinic/. Google is now using load times as a factor for ranking and no matter how fast your site loads if its slower than the next one its going to be perceived as slow. 2)Less code?No.Comparably,table-based websites are having much less lines of code to write.Because,you are also writing the CSS,and its always not one file.So,code is much much less. Browser support for most of css is as consistent as it is for tables. If you need to create a modern site that supports an older browser, CSS imposes huge costs. Q&A for work. Saying things like, all people who use tables are quite frankly is absurd. However, you can build a great site using tables and a poor site using css. The whole semantics argument is nonsense. I do understand the appeal of tables. After-all the 3 column layout with equal height is referred to as the holy-grail in css, enough said! All you really need to do float the customer service phone number and search form to the right. Im going to remain open minded and give CSS a chance! The comics are great. CSS changes are device friendly. As far as I know Ive never provided 100% of the code to any of the sites youve developed, which would mean the issue isnt necessarily my code. Taylor Graphics, LLC divs are also a pain, ooh tables are so complex, check out the css for that div when its all done. Let us have a glance on the benefits and drawbacks of CSS. WebDisadvantages of tables. However, I dont think thats the main reason to choose a css layout over a table-based layout. Youre welcome to use them to layout sites if you want. With people employing a batch of various range of smart devices to access websites over the web, theres a requirement for responsive web design. The conclusion isnt that it takes a long time to communicate in Spanish. Tables/grids (the shape) are the holy grail of layouts. However please dont imply that css cant work for old sites or makes it more difficult to work on an existing table driven site. For some reason this is frowned upon as well. I do think more code means more chances of making a show stopping kind of error. Really? With the 4 methods if its important to a site to support older versions of IE then sure dont choose the method which might not work with those versions. Different levels of CSS i.e. Advantages and Disadvantages Determining which extent type to use, depends business requirements and perspective. Search engines are interested in your content, not your code.. Both my table and div layouts use css equally. At most the html would require a single class or id extra. I think there are appropriate uses for tables, but I dont think the overall layout of a page is one of those appropriate uses. Tables are simply not faster to create. Graphics are easier in CSS3, thus making it easy to make the site appealing. Could you send me a link to the page? I think not. My point was they arent the same thing and so to learn how to use divs you should learn the strengths and weaknesses of divs and not try to force the strengths and weaknesses of tables and table cells on them. The performance claims Ive read about here and elsewhere on the web for divs over tables are over-hyped I found only a 10 ms advantage for the div technique over the table technique. At first its confusing since its such a different approach, but once you make it through the learning curve its obvious that the div/css combination is a much better and more flexible approach to building sites. For Row height is select Exactly from the dropdown. With Googles latest algorithm update (Caffeine) emphasising page load times as a SE ranking factor it is now more important than ever from an SEO stand point to reduce the amount of code on a webpage. Its been years since I wrote more than a few lines of code specifically for any one browser and none of that code is a hack. A list? Theyre interested in your content. Learning to write CSS layouts bucket be tricky, especially if you are usual with using tables, but here's why CSS is your best programming bet. Dont worry Im not taking your questions as a need to defend css. Thanks Rami and interesting analogy. Tables can be part of your layout, but they shouldnt make up the entire layout. Unless you offer specifics Im going to assume youre just name calling, because you were unhappy with my previous comment. A div-based layout is: That might not seem like a lot, but just those three things are enough to make a div based approach better to a table based approach. I fought this very same battle using tables back in the 90s. Laying information out this way is simply more intuitive than floating divs, not from a web standards perspective, but from a kid puts shapes in the holes perspective. It could mean one less page they get to crawl on your site. However, know that the industry has moved on. When using CSS for layout, browsers can cache BTW why css layout over table layout? Thats not an apples to apples comparison. The issue though was how I was using css and not css itself. 2. A paragraph? Do I have to have a separate div for each line? I agree with using divs and css to display content for what I think is a pretty simple reason if I want to change the look of my site I can write a new style sheet using the same div IDs and the site is suddenly completely different. Assuming no major errors I think the search spiders will get through your code fine whether its css or tables. I cant tell any discernable speed difference between a table layout and a CSS layouts load time. As I see it, table layouts have precisely two advantages: 1. There might be cross-browser issues while using CSS. Suppose you have a typical two column layout (content and sidebar) and you wanted to reverse the order. I learned by reading the book Eric Meyer on CSS. The defaults only come into play if you dont specifically tell the browser what to use. Your email address will not be published. I make a change to the template file and boom, it changes on all pages. Thanks Craig. I agree with what you are saying, however I think with the advancement of HTML 5, tables will start to disappear. Here is the CSS code, so far, through Dreamweaver: he argument is made by people comparing learning something new to learning something they already know well.. As you mentioned, pages built in tables have to load twice (something I didnt know until reading this post) add to this that the example you showed: clearly illustrates how much extra code is required for tables. Conclusion. 3. It amazes me that some folks still use tables for layout in this day and age. Early on you had to use tables to layout a site well. Eventually it works, but at what cost? Im sure there are a few out there already, but one more wont hurt. On the other hand, judicious use of semantically meaningful HTML combined with CSS might confine such changes to the CSS and the pictures used.
Borderlands 3 Best Moze Build Mayhem 10,
Cimarron Horse Trailer Weight,
Vortex Mods Red Dead Redemption 2,
Where To Buy Creeping Thyme Seeds,
How To Cover A Belly Button Piercing For Swimming,
Articles A
