Divs/ tables ?

[kraizii88z 0]

"What is" better? I read an interesting article about the benifits of talbes & divs..
http://www.decloak.com/Dev/CSSTables/CSS_Tables_01.aspx
Most prefer tables b/c they're familiar,
but it seems most people are turning their attention to div-style formats..

[marijnnn 0]

hm, actually, the trend is more towards tables i think. divs are good to really position one element, or make it appear over other stuff. but i'd use tables to layout en entire page. it's easy.

[r3d1405241470 0]

about the full css div layout it's so challenging and flexible

[Bigyan 0]

Yup, from the initial days only, I've been using tables and div tags for better layout of my pages. They really give u some controll.With the right amount of cellspacing, cellpadding, border colour, background colour, table tags and div tags have become indespensible !!Bye

[r3d1405241470 0]

at first use the div (full css layout) is tough. even impossible to adapt mostly to table users like me. but when you learn it, it just like a piece of cake :)div layout gave you much power and lighter code in designing html template, and you can create layout with ease that is unyielding to table

[lhunath 0]

The diffrence is easy.

Tables- They are old, they are limited, they are easier, they're for amateurs.

CSS Positioning (ea. Divs)- They're new, they're flexible, they're tough, they're for professionals.

 

Tables don't allow you to put alot of dynamicness in your webpage. If you have a layout and you want to change it a little, you have to rebuild it from start, because the cells of a table just don't allow for easy manipulation. They're a pain in the backside for any webdesigner that wants to go beyond the limitations of normal ancient design. CSS Positioning provides an amasing solution to all the problems. But it's a bit harder to manage, and the biggest issue of all. IE supports them, but they screwed up with the Box Model. So things look diffrent in IE... Sigh, shoot the bastards. Thus you sometimes need special CSS Hacks to give a diffrent kind of Positioning to IE in order to make it show the same as good browsers.

[avalon1405241471 0]

Most javascript functions are written with DIV to create effects.Most commons use of DIV in javascript is hidding and showing content on click, mouse over or conditions met. This type of javascript effects are generally know as "Dynamic Content".

[marijnnn 0]

The diffrence is easy.

Tables- They are old, they are limited, they are easier, they're for amateurs.

CSS Positioning (ea. Divs)- They're new, they're flexible, they're tough, they're for professionals.

 

Tables don't allow you to put alot of dynamicness in your webpage. If you have a layout and you want to change it a little, you have to rebuild it from start, because the cells of a table just don't allow for easy manipulation. They're a pain in the backside for any webdesigner that wants to go beyond the limitations of normal ancient design. CSS Positioning provides an amasing solution to all the problems. But it's a bit harder to manage, and the biggest issue of all. IE supports them, but they screwed up with the Box Model. So things look diffrent in IE... Sigh, shoot the bastards. Thus you sometimes need special CSS Hacks to give a diffrent kind of Positioning to IE in order to make it show the same as good browsers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i'd like to contradict that:

a good site is one that doesn't have too much movement & animation. it has to be fast, clear, handy and have a good placement of information.

most companies use tables. div's are as old as tables and are cool to position one element. i wouldn't call them more difficult.

TABLES!

[Deathstarr 0]

I like makeing Div Layers better then I like Makeing Table.

[lhunath 0]

uh huh.. DHTML.. and I personally hate it kind of. CSS is far more professional. Personal taste I guess, but JavaScript is just generally evil.

[marijnnn 0]

well, you sure as hell should keep in mind that some people have javascript disabled, which isn't as stupid as some might think.so if your site depends on javascript, it sucks hehe.i use javascript for my login system (i calculate in md5 hash of my password before i post my form. like that, someone sniffing the network won't be able to get my password...), but only because i'm the only one who is supposed to log in anyway and i have javascript enabled, so that's no problem.dhtml.. nonono!

[r3d1405241470 0]

well i think that js has some good side and also a professional side like a client form validation before server side validation, it helps for some instances. and much more, i thought it's useless and evil but it's quite interesting

[lhunath 0]

It has good ways of implementation and good concepts are possible with it, but the language itself is just a screwup. They should make a new client side language like it, and do it right this time.

[marijnnn 0]

hmz, what's so bad about javascript,, the languague?

[lhunath 0]

First of all, incompatibilities. Few browsers support the large gamma of functions JavaScript offers. And you have specific browsers that decided to make specific JavaScript functionalities which only work on their browsers, like Microsoft IE & Netscape. Thus, people working with those browsers, and using them as only testing browser will generate JavaScript which is ****ed in other browsers, completely screwing the primairy objective of a Web Application / Site, which is compatibility. They argue that IE is used by many people. This arguement only proves how lame and shortminded they are.

Secondly, JavaScript parsers are a pain in the backside, especially the Internet Explorer one. Code goes wrong when there is no reason for it to go wrong, because, for example, a div in the body didn't load in time, and the script can't find it.

Many browsers don't even have JavaScript parsers, which causes them to be unable to browse a specific site that depends on it.

JavaScript is insecure. It allows far too much datagathering, and allows for people to abuse holes in software. Holes are unpreventable, but JavaScript is a gate to take hackers there. Any clientsided script is a victim of this, unless if there are extensive restrictions. Java does a very good job, they should learn from it.

Most of all, the users which incorperate it. They are stupid and retarded. They don't realise that their code is evil, and they can't be bothered to learn JavaScript decently. Browsers should give parsing errors and not display the website should there be problems with the code, just like a Java compiler won't allow a program with screwed syntax to be run.