Ron Koster wrote: > >> one of more important reasons is speed . >> >> CSS pages render about 1/3rd less time than table based layouts >> > > So instead of rendering in, say, 3 to 6 seconds (which, off the top > of my head, seems about average, for any average page on the 'net -- > at least on my computer), it'll only take a mere 2 to 4 seconds? > > Sorry, but I'm not sure how "important" a reason that is. > > Ron ;) >
Good grief. Give it up. Use tables. And be done with it. Please give me some good advice in your next letter. I promise not to follow it. -- Edna St. Vincent Millay, Letters US poet (1892 - 1950) -- A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming. http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [[email protected]] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
