At 7:34 PM +0200 3/7/06, shlomi asaf wrote:
>I've looked at http://news.google.com page code layout, and I've seen
>that the page layout is table based.
>
>the containers are tables, the hidden personalization panels are also
>in tables.
>most of the page in build using tables. even the pictures are in
>cellspacing=5 tables.
>
>why is that?
I doubt anyone here can say, unless we have Google folks who
worked on that project and are willing to comment publicly.
Speculating on the reasons for a specific design's choices isn't
really on-topic, anyway.
What WOULD be on-topic, and quite interesting, would be if someone
took that page and recreated it using CSS, and everyone worked to
help make it as cross-browser friendly as possible. Then we'd have a
comparison, and a great example of the tradeoffs that are involved in
CSS design (and there are some-- there are always tradeoffs no matter
what technology or technique you use).
So I hope that's where this thread ends up going.
>after all our researches (and i can speak only for myself), table
>structure after all are the stable, consistent and reliable layout
>there is.
>of course- content will be putted using right HTML- P,H1-6,Divs, but
>still- the table layout proves himself as the right solution.
>
>what do you think?
I think your final assertion could easily be taken as flame-bait,
and if others actually do take it that way, I'll have to close the
thread. Hopefully, they'll not do so and instead concentrate on
staying on-topic.
--
Eric A. Meyer (http://meyerweb.com/eric/), List Chaperone
"CSS is much too interesting and elegant to be not taken seriously."
-- Martina Kosloff (http://mako4css.com/)
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7b2 testing hub -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
