Re:Why CSS should not be used for layout
by tripngroove on Tuesday February 03, 2009 @05:31PM
(#464822)
"Tables should not be used purely as a means to layout document content as this may present problems when rendering to non-visual media. Additionally, when used with graphics, these tables may force users to scroll horizontally to view a table designed on a system with a larger display. To minimize these problems, authors should use style sheets to control layout rather than tables."
Re:Why CSS should not be used for layout
by fauigerzigerk on Wednesday February 04, 2009 @04:04AM
(#465477)
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
From that RFC:
SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
I don't buy the argument that tables somehow imply semantics that contradict their use in layouting. Tables have no semantics without a formal system that lends them semantics (like the relational model).
I'm not aware that the W3C or anyone else defined the formal meaning of tables, and since HTML is a UI technology I don't see why "table" should not be interpreted as a form of laying out content in rows and columns.