> There is something about some CSS 2 / XHTML compliant > websites that bothers me, compared to table layed out websites.. > > > What it is, is "looks"
Yes, I've heard this before but have you seen all the different layouts at csszengarden.com? There's definitely a few unique ones in there and the site was conceived to disprove exactly that notion. If you haven't seen the layouts lately, check it out and let us know if you still think that all CSS sites look-and-feel similar. > http://www.imax.com.au/ > > to look exactly the same but without tables :) So, curious... why, specifically, would you think this would be a challenge for a table-less layout? Because of the JS menus? To be honest, the layout has a problem, though (viewing with FF on Windows). There's this rather large blue space between the image of the dolphin and the far-left column... I could definitely do that with CSS -- in fact, it happens all the time with my CSS -- because of my buggy code. :-) ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
