On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 1:19 AM, Michael Adams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 03 May 2008 21:07:53 -0400
> Michael B Allen wrote:
>
> > On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Michael Adams
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > But the same code is much cleaner without the table
> >
> > Ahh, I k
Michael B Allen wrote:
> On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Michael Adams
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> But the same code is much cleaner without the table
>
> Ahh, I knew that was coming.
And it was easy to predict that illogical and inconvenient (what's the
default rendering of and how do you
On Sat, 03 May 2008 21:07:53 -0400
Michael B Allen wrote:
> On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Michael Adams
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But the same code is much cleaner without the table
>
> Ahh, I knew that was coming. I've tried creating forms without tables
> but I could never get the dat
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Michael Adams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But the same code is much cleaner without the table
Ahh, I knew that was coming. I've tried creating forms without tables
but I could never get the data to line up into ... well ... a table.
And AFAICT your examples don't
On Sun, 04 May 2008 12:48:57 +1200
Michael Adams wrote:
Errata inline
> On Sat, 03 May 2008 15:01:39 -0400
> Michael B Allen wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm exploring the idea of using modules of code to emitting reusable
> > HTML UI elements like postal addresses, login forms, linked images
> > a
On Sat, 03 May 2008 15:01:39 -0400
Michael B Allen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm exploring the idea of using modules of code to emitting reusable
> HTML UI elements like postal addresses, login forms, linked images
> and in turn more sophisticated elements such as invoices, forum posts,
> etc. Because the
