On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Colin (Sandy) Pittendrigh < sandy.pittendr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good Bradfrost link above. Thank you for that. > > Here's a question. Since the great CSS Positioning leap forward we no > longer have to use nested tables for overall page layout....as did most of > us during the late 1990s. > > But I do occasionally (still) use tables for laying out forms. As long as > the tables are NOT nested inside the TD elements of a surrounding table, > and as long as it's an occasional tool only, I don't see the harm. > > Violent prejudice against tables for layout is similar, in a way, to the > way C-programmers now rail against the infamous goto statement, which is > sometimes (break out of a doubly nested loop) useful and not > harmful.............if kept under control, and if the goto points forward a > few lines of code only. > > So. Is table layout now a sin no matter what? Even if not nested and used > only occasionally? .....as for forms? > I'd have to add responsive layouts to the list of criteria for, specifically, using tables for form layout. Seems to me it would not be ideal to, for example, have labels in one td and associated field in another td, all in the same row, and then to try to change the layout for small screens. Keep 'em coming. Off-list as needed... Thanks all. -- Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic | ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
