Do away with tables??

[dpdoug]

I've read that some developers are trying to get away from using tables in page layout to speed up page loading.

If they use fixed positioning, how do they get around the problem of users having different resolutions than the page was designed in?

Also, how do they work with columns?

It all sounds like more trouble than the little speed that results.

Comments?

 

[philote]

For 'fixed positioning' I believe most developers design for the smallest screen size they want to accept. For columns, there are several good examples out there that show how to do them, such as glish.com and A List Apart(search for 'columns').

As far as why use css instead of tables, it's not just speed that drives developers in that direction. Using css also makes it much easier to maintain a site and change a site's design since the layout is separated from the content. You can also have more than one style for a site and allow users the option of styles.

There have been many discussions on css vs. tables in this forum that a little searching is bound to bring up.

 

[taylorantone]

The argument for using CSS is that tables should be used for displaying tabular data, not handling layout. Think of CSS as the introduction of the round wheel to replace the sled. Now you can get around faster, easier, and in style--and the sled can still be used for it's #1 purpose.

As for a fixed/dynamic width and different user resolutions, the safest (and personally the most visually pleasing) is the site coded to fit into an 800x600 full-screen width. Some people prefer fluid layouts and think that fixed positions are passe, and there it's just a matter of setting your div's to % widths instead of absolute widths in pixels.

http://www.alistapart.com

is a great site for delving into the world of CSS. If you want a visual display of the versatility of CSS, check out

http://www.csszengarden.com