G'day again :-)
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20050630/#layouttables
unless of course you would argue the difference between "should not" and
"not allowed", in which case I guess you would win.
It's a working draft, not a recommendation or a standard and you're right. I used to work as a QA Auditor (ISO9001). In standards parlance, "should not" has a different meaning than "must not" or "shall not". Still, if you want to use that document....
"*Generally*, display technologies such as [CSS2]
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20050630/#CSS2> can
achieve the desired layout effect with improved accessibility."
Generally? Meaning there are exceptions?
"However, *when it is necessary to use a table for layout*, the table
must linearize in a readable order." So there are times "when it is
*necessary* to use a table for layout"?
Keep reading...
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20050630/#layouttables-avoid
"It is *recommended* that authors not use the |table| element for layout
purposes *unless the desired effect absolutely cannot be achieved using
CSS*."
I rest my case.
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
