[UPHPU] More CSS frustration
John David Anderson
uphpu at johndavidanderson.net
Wed Jan 17 13:55:25 MST 2007
On Jan 17, 2007, at 1:31 PM, Mac Newbold wrote:
> Did you notice that while the HTML is quite clean on these
> and width constraints on the divs match up from one to another. How
> is that any less of a hack? That is not my idea of a robust way to
> build a HTML/CSS page. Why should we need client-side scripting to
> make our pages look right when they load?
I didn't. Bad example.
I suppose the prime layout example would be CSS Zen Garden, but I
assumed that mentioning it was beating a dead horse.
> I could ask for a raise of hands of people who have had experiences
> with CSS fragility in "pure css" layouts, but I don't want to flood
> the mail server. Among people I've talked to, even the pure CSS
> advocates admit quickly that there are some tricks (aka hacks) you
> need to know before you'll have good results generally.
Table layout is 100% hack. Just because people have used it for a
long time, it doesn't mean its not a hack. Using spacer images and
farting around with cellpadding/width/alignment/borders is way more
hacky than defining page definitions with CSS. Table layouts is a
hacky workaround, utilizing the way browsers display tables.
> You can't really argue that the code I write (myself, or as part of
> work with my coworkers) isn't at least as maintainable (to me/us at
> least) as any code you could write your way.
I can give a visual facelift to my sites without changing the markup.
A major overhaul might require the addition of some <img/div/span>
tags. Pages created using tables for layouts are not this flexible in
> When you write code for a living, or even as a hobby, isn't it
> really about getting the most done in the shortest amount of time
> over the long term?
> Quality of the code, including maintainablity, modularity,
> separation, and any other good things, is something that heavily
> contributes to time saved over the lifetime of the code. If I have
> to invest 10 extra hours to a project to do it "ideally", then I'd
> want to be pretty sure that it will save me 10 hours or more down
> the road. If I'm spending time making code reusable that I won't
> ever end up reusing, or making code more maintainable that I will
> never look at again, what good does it do me? You're buying
> something with your efforts that doesn't get you anything in
> return. If it gives you satisfaction do to it that way, and that
> satisfaction is worth the price you pay for it, that's great, but
> that varies from person to person.
The reason I use CSS is because I've experienced the benefits you've
mentioned time and time again. There's no drawback. The occasional
CSS workaround is always better than table layouts, because table-
layouts are 100% workaround.
More information about the UPHPU