[UPHPU] More CSS frustration

[John David Anderson]

On Jan 23, 2007, at 11:58 AM, Joshua Simpson wrote:

>
>
> On 1/23/07, John David Anderson <uphpu at johndavidanderson.net> wrote:
>
>
> I guess it depends on your own definition of "dinosaur", but I
> personally want to move away from using a technique that started to
> disappear ten years ago. Sure, you need to take every situation into
> consideration, but the general feeling should probably be to cut down
> on the practice.
>
> Anyone who's ever seen any of my (admittedly crappy) designs knows  
> I hardly ever use tables.  Ever.  Still, they can and are useful in  
> some situations.  I'm certainly not saying that I prefer tables  
> over CSS layout in most, nearly all, situations, but there are  
> those that arise when using a table is just plain easier and less  
> of a hassle to get what you want.

Then I think we're probably talking about the same thing, then.

> Yeah - anyone who uses  <table> for... tables... all the time isn't
> flexible enough. ;) Seriously, though, I don't think CSS is some
> bleeding edge fad. This has been around for a long time, and using it
> for everything (*gasp*) is actually what it was designed for.
>
>
> I assume you mean '<table> for ... layouts..'.  I don't think CSS  
> is a bleeding edge fad either, and neither is the popularity of  
> RDBMSes for web applications.  Or AJAX for user interfaces.   
> However, they are evangelized and overused all the time.  Sometimes  
> when they're not appropriate.  Just like pure CSS omgz you used a  
> table for something on your site omgz you totally don't know CSS  
> nor design!ONE!

Maybe. On the other hand, refusing to take up a new (well, not so  
new) technology because of the fanbois isn't really a good idea  
either. I'd imagine we're talking about the same basic idea here,  
too, and I agree with you.

My general feeling from the group and this list has been anti-CSS, so  
that might be why you see me defend my ground more strongly. I can't  
really understand it, and that's probably the other reason. :)

-- John