Good additional reading:
http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2004/05/15/tables_oh_th/
Read him, live by him.Also Eric Meyer, my new God. His new CSS The
Definitive Guide is a pure eye opener.
However hybrids work, we should still be using semantic markup in them.
Nesting tables or using td
Thats certainly good stuff in that article.
In the article he says this : Even if you have the most responsive team members, youre still limited to what they know. Like it or not, many people look at markup from a presentational standpoint, ie. this form element needs to sit below this label,
Jim Davis wrote:
The main problem with the hybrid layout is that it does not allow full
separation of presentation and logic.
http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/200310.html#t200310015
Jochem
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
Sandy Clark wrote:
I for one, code my pages in the simplest HTML possible now.Much easier
to maintain than those nested table thingies I did for years. When I am
satisified that the HTML document says what I want and is understood in
both visual and aural browsers, then I start playing with
ight: 20px;
}
br {
clear: left;
}
/style
_
From: Andre Turrettini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 12:14 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Thats certainly good stuff in that article.
In the article he says this : Even if you have the most respo
p is a semantic structure, it instructs a user agent that this is the end
of a series of thoughts.How it is respresented visually can be
accomplished via CSS.I can indent a p. I can make margins or padding
bigger or smaller. Heck, I can even place a paragraph above another one
using CSS.Every user
Good readin material for you, Sandy, from Zeldman, a well-known standards advocate:
http://www.zeldman.com/dwws/pdfs/0735712018C_08.pdf
Especially insightful is the part that goes:
A Transitional Book for a Transitional Time
To the kind of standards geek who spends hours each week arguing about
Read him, live by him.Also Eric Meyer, my new God. His new CSS The
Definitive Guide is a pure eye opener.
However hybrids work, we should still be using semantic markup in them.
Nesting tables or using td class=heading doesn't help. I've come to CSS
from an interest in creating accessible web
Jim Davis wrote:
I'm sorry - is this not a good place to rant?I'm pretty sure I've seen
rants here before. nearly positive in fact.;^)
It is an excellent place to rant. It is not an efficient place to rant.
Jochem
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User
Werd, bro.
-Kevin
- Original Message -
From: Jim Davis
I love the idea of CSS.I love the idea of separating content from
presentation.But Christ-on-a-crutch why can't our replacement technology
elegantly handle the simplest and most common layout ever!
[Todays Threads]
[This
I have no idea why, but that struck me as absurdly funny.
Today's analogy:CF-Community is a treadmill.It's a great place to
run, but you don't get very far.
--BenD
Jochem van Dieten wrote:
Jim Davis wrote:
I'm sorry - is this not a good place to rant?I'm pretty sure I've seen
rants
-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Jim Davis wrote:
I'm sorry - is this not a good place to rant?I'm pretty sure I've seen
rants here before. nearly positive in fact.;^)
It is an excellent place to rant. It is not an efficient place to rant.
Jochem
_
[Todays Threads
www.bluerobot.com
there used to be a site layout there that did exactly what you want
completely with CSS.
I'm pretty sure I downloaded it so I'll have to look.
I'd look right away, but I'm out the door for a meeting...
will
Jim Davis wrote:
Actually that site doesn't have any examples that
Jim,
it's not CSS that is at fault here.
It's the most visible proponents' fault. Because they have created the impression (in people not familiar with the concept of stylesheets) that CSS is about NOT using tables for layout. And that's just plain wrong.
CSS is about automating presentational
Uh oh!
- Original Message -
From: Irvin Gomez
It's the most visible proponents' fault. Because they have created the
impression (in people not familiar with the concept of stylesheets) that CSS
is about NOT using tables for layout. And that's just plain wrong.
Them's fightin' words.
]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 2:09 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Jim,
it's not CSS that is at fault here.
It's the most visible proponents' fault. Because they have created the
impression (in people not familiar with the concept of stylesheets) that CSS
is about
That - what Kevin said!That's my point!
It seems like they just weren't very pragmatic. you'd think four years ago
when they were thinking of recommending the spec somebody would have piped
up and said sounds good. but can you do cnet.com in it?If the answer was
sorta. maybe, if you... then it
]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 2:09 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Jim,
it's not CSS that is at fault here.
It's the most visible proponents' fault. Because they have created the
impression (in people not familiar with the concept of stylesheets) that CSS
is about
or obtuse.
Jim Davis
_
From: Michael Haggerty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:07 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Jim -
There are plenty of tutorials on multi-column layouts using exclusively CSS,
you just have to look for them
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Jim -
There are plenty of tutorials on multi-column layouts using exclusively CSS,
you just have to look for them. The main thing is you always have to use a
float of one form or another, which means you need to specify the width of
the columns you are looking
Understood. I think I pointed out you have to use a float, which requires a width be specified.
I could see how this could mess up a layout unless you go to great lengths in testing.
M
Jim Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is simply no simple to do a full-height multi-column layout in
I am well aware of the nature of vertical alignment in CSS1. My comments were meant to suggest this is a deficency and it would be better if it could apply to block level elements as well. For instance, one thing I have a real problem with is DIVs appearing in DIVs, I would like to be able to just
Gah! I took another crack at it again based on your rant. Yup. Didn't get it
to work. Thought I had it until I changed the amount of content to force the
container object.
No surprise, really. But you know how you get on a roll and you're thinking,
I've got it!, and then you really, really don't
:30 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Gah! I took another crack at it again based on your rant. Yup. Didn't
get
it
to work. Thought I had it until I changed the amount of content to
force
the
container object.
No surprise, really. But you know how you get
If you're very familiar with CSS, then you'll know that CSS doesn't offer any layout capabilities, beyond the styling and positioning of page elements, like tables and their common counterpart, the div tag.
Tables and div's are just containers for other tags. As such, they are the building blocks
- I'm not sure what you mean there.
Jim Davis
_
From: Irvin Gomez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 6:26 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
If you're very familiar with CSS, then you'll know that CSS doesn't offer
any layout capabilities
you mean there.
Jim Davis
_
From: Irvin Gomez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 6:26 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
If you're very familiar with CSS, then you'll know that CSS doesn't offer
any layout capabilities, beyond
Have you tried some of the samples out there? I found this one that
looks like what you want to do:
http://nemesis1.f2o.org/articles
FWIW, I feel the same way. I love CSS in theory. Practice is another
story. Time consuming doesn't even begin to explain it. Perhaps fine for
people who get
Hmm.
How bout this?
Note I haven't tested completely for cross browser, but it works fairly
well.
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd
html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml xml:lang=en lang=en
head
meta
25, 2004 7:28 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Have you tried some of the samples out there? I found this one that
looks like what you want to do:
http://nemesis1.f2o.org/articles
FWIW, I feel the same way. I love CSS in theory. Practice is another
story. Time
25, 2004 7:45 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
I've spent a lot of time on that site.;^)That definitely falls into the
sorta does it category - but the image used to mimic full columns doesn't
degrade well and is fixed width.Since the column color/background
Jim Davis wrote:
Every time I get into this it amazes me that CSS made it so damn
difficultto do one of the most common layouts online: a full-width
header, two equal-height (despite content) columns (one for navigation
and one for content), and a full-width footer.
Every time I get into
Davis
_
From: Sandy Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 7:30 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Hmm.
How bout this?
Note I haven't tested completely for cross browser, but it works fairly
well.
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0
.
This is like somebody coming out with a new, replacement brick that won't
let you build rectangular doors.
Jim Davis
_
From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 7:53 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Jim Davis wrote:
Every time I get
At 07:07 PM 5/25/04, you wrote:
Sorry - just venting.
Every time I get into this it amazes me that CSS made it so damn difficult
to do one of the most common layouts online: a full-width header, two
equal-height (despite content) columns (one for navigation and one for
content), and a full-width
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Actually, height is always computed in relation to the parent element.If
you use html, body{height: 100%}, then containing elements are always
computed in relation to that. Using html, instead of just body helps Opera.
If you are looking
Try this one, not mine, but it looks good.
http://www.pmob.co.uk/temp/2columncentred_equalising.htm
_
From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 7:54 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
I think we missed the mark here - this design
Try this one.
http://www.pmob.co.uk/temp/2colfixedtest_4.htm
_
From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 8:01 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
It seems that a main problem is that the height is calculated to the height
Actually that site doesn't have any examples that show columns with equal
heights - and thus lies the problem.
Just to be clear I'm actually quite good at CSS - been doing it for years
and my designs have been featured in a couple of CSS books (early books to
be sure, but actual-factual books
will not find a way to do this that doesn't involve some
sort of hack.My point is simply that such a common layout should never
need a hack.
Jim Davis
_
From: Sandy Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 8:04 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Try
://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=1069
==
- Original Message -
From: Jim Davis
To: CF-Community
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 6:58 PM
Subject: RE: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
I'm sorry - is this not a good place to rant?I'm pretty sure I've seen
rants here before
background color and no
borders then CSS works fine.
Jim Davis
_
From: Doug White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 8:42 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Damn CSS... Damn it to hell!
Here is an example of a single CSS that handles header and footer, plus a
three
column layout
42 matches
Mail list logo
