Why tables for layout is stupid?

[Webnauts]

Why tables for layout is stupid: problems defined, solutions offered.

http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/index.html

I am sure you will love this resource, as I did!

[carbonize]

Somethings cannot be achieved with DIVs and CSS and so we use tables. I don't care how bad some people say they are they will always have their uses.

[Sualdam]

It amuses me with 'professionals' that no matter what tools are available, someone will start trashing them when a new one comes along :)

Strikes me that the only thing 'wrong' with tables is that you can use something else ;)

[Webnauts]

Sualdam I would not agree with you.
Why? have a look here: http://www.saila.com/usage/layouts/cssvtables.shtml

[Webnauts]

Carbonite, can you tell an example what works with tables and not with CSS?

[redcircle]

The only reason that I can see to use CSS instead of tables is to allow the seperation of design from content. Using CSS allows you to have many different designs without having to change your HTML file. I have not yet mastered the art of using CSS and have it uniform across browsers without little hacks that I find are a big waste of time. So until the browsers adopt a standard for CSS I will be forced to use a hybrid.

Also CSS degrades gracefully which is not the case with tables.

You can also get better SEO with CSS. When I switched to a CSS design by placement jumped.

[Narasinha]

Tables were originally meant to be used to display information that you often see with a row of headings describing the lists of information presented below. Designers discovered that they could display graphical information in the tables, manipulating row and column spans, padding and spacing, and... voila! Perfect page layout! It displays properly (i.e., the way the designer wants it) every time!

Tables are still meant to contain tabular information. I used tables for layout purposes at one time. That was before I became familiar with W3C standards. (Yes, I know, "Here he goes again with the standards!")

Using tables for layout purposes is okay (in my opinion) if you are creating a page that no one will ever visit with a page reader (or you simply don't care if they do), one that you don't mind loading more slowly because the browser takes a while to figure out your complicated nested table structure, one that you have to trash when you redesign because the code looks like spaghetti, and one that takes up a little more server space because of the file size.

Do you hire a licensed electrician to change the bulb in your desk lamp? No. Do you hire one to connect the peripherals to your computer? Probably not. Do you hire one to rewire your home? I would hope so. For important work, you turn to him. Why do you do this for one situation and not the other? Because the electrician is more knowledgable, is licensed (in most cases) and may be a member of a union. What does this licensing mean? It means he wires your house according to approved standards. It means when you turn on your computer the lights in the kitchen don't shut off. It means that you won't have a fire hazard at your junction box.

Granted, your web site is probably not as critical to your life as the wiring in your house. But it illustrates the need for standards. Without them, there would be Netscape sites that would only work on Netscape, not displaying at all in any other browser. There would be Internet Explorer ONLY graphics, that would not load in any other browser. There would be Macintosh-only sites, that any other system would be unable to view. Every type of site would contain proprietary code that would only work for specific circumstances. It would be like having your electrician install outlets, only to find that they are type 'A' outlets, and the stereo you own needs a type 'B' outlet, and the new computer you want needs a type 'C' outlet.

Tables as 'tools' used by designers for perfect layout was not a case of using the proper tool. The proper tool did not yet exist (CSS), so designers made tables do what they wanted. Yes, I suppose you could pound in a nail with a wrench.

There is nothing wrong with tables. They are a useful set of tags, like so many others. They are meant to contain tabular data. HTML has evolved, and in a way, gotten back to its original intent. HTML is used to describe the content. CSS is there to describe the layout and visual display. Developers can continue to use tables to lay out their pages, but what happens when the boss wants to know why someone keeps emailing him about the web site not being available to his screen reader?

[starrwriter]

It amuses me with 'professionals' that no matter what tools are available, someone will start trashing them when a new one comes along :)Strikes me that the only thing 'wrong' with tables is that you can use something else ;)

I agree. The CSS stampede is faddish group-think and lemming-like behavior. There's nothing wrong with tables.

[carbonize]

Webnauts can you do a segmented picture using css? I mean a sliced picture as in how google presents its logo, and could you guarantee that it would appear as it should on every browser that supports images?

[redcircle]

It would be like having your electrician install outlets, only to find that they are type 'A' outlets, and the stereo you own needs a type 'B' outlet, and the new computer you want needs a type 'C' outlet.

I guess you would need to use a bunch of adapters... lol .. and on the computer.. plugins.. lol.. I love your analogy..:)