alignment using CSS

"dorayme" <doraymeRidThis (AT) optusnet (DOT) com.au> wrote

In article <aJ6xj.19789$421.15994 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au>,
"rf" <rf (AT) invalid (DOT) com> wrote:

"dorayme" <doraymeRidThis (AT) optusnet (DOT) com.au> wrote in message
news:doraymeRidThis-48E54C.16342527022008 (AT) news-vip (DOT) optusnet.com.au...

It is possible and it does make sense but you still should use a
table because it makes more sense to do this. It is like this. If
you are discouraged from using a hammer and well-aimed chisel on
an accessible-by-spanner nut, this does not mean that you should
use a hammer and chisel on an accessible-by-spanner nut on a
motor bike or boat or washing machine.

What?

I am not going to explain this! Unless you put up some dough and
we have a fair referee (how about Luigi?) that you get it back if
I cannot make the analogy good. <g

There *must* be some words missing. The paragraph appears to be incomplete
and self contradictory. No wonder the OP is confused :-)

OP: Simple, if it's tablular data then use a table. At the extreme, if all
else fails and you still can't do what you want then use a table. To use
doraymes analogy (I think), sometimes there simply is not a spannar
available to fit that bolt.

--
Richard.

ashkaan57 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com wrote:

OK, I am totally confused now. I hear that it is good design not to
use tables
But now I am being told it is OK to use tables, even if I am not just
displaying data.

It's not simply an issue of "just displaying data". It's an issue of
relationships. If there is a relationship between the rows and/or
columns, then consider it tabular data.

Should I, ot shouldn't I, use CSS if all I am doing
is aligning a bunch of controls (labels, dropdowns, textboxes, ..) on
a page?

Some argue that forms are not tabular data, but that's a matter of
opinion. There is a relationship between a form label, and its control,
isn't there? If you put in a column header for "labels" and one for
"data" it all makes sense, does it not?

I'd use a table.

--
Berg

On Feb 27, 9:54*am, Bergamot <berga... (AT) visi (DOT) com> wrote:

ashkaa... (AT) hotmail (DOT) com wrote:

OK, I am totally confused now. I hear that it is good design not to
use tables
But now I am being told it is OK to use tables, even if I am not just
displaying data.

It's not simply an issue of "just displaying data". It's an issue of
relationships. If there is a relationship between the rows and/or
columns, then consider it tabular data.

Should I, ot shouldn't I, use CSS if all I am doing
is aligning a bunch of controls (labels, dropdowns, textboxes, ..) on
a page?

Some argue that forms are not tabular data, but that's a matter of
opinion. There is a relationship between a form label, and its control,
isn't there? If you put in a column header for "labels" and one for
"data" it all makes sense, does it not?

I'd use a table.

--
Berg

OK, it seems the popular consensu is to use tables to align labels and
controls in a form. If I didn't know, I would think I was visiting
"comp.infosystem.www.authoring.tables" newsgroup!

In article
<5cc1d29e-18c7-45bf-a710-37522e2e2fd5 (AT) x41g2000hsb (DOT) googlegroups.co
m>,
ashkaan57 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com wrote:

OK, it seems the popular consensu is to use tables to align labels and
controls in a form. If I didn't know, I would think I was visiting
"comp.infosystem.www.authoring.tables" newsgroup!

Like feeling you are meeting an established religion when talking
to a group of atheists? This feeling is a confusion of thought.

--
dorayme

In article <kP8xj.19831$421.1745 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au>,
"rf" <rf (AT) invalid (DOT) com> wrote:

"dorayme" <doraymeRidThis (AT) optusnet (DOT) com.au> wrote in message
news:doraymeRidThis-48FB40.18252627022008 (AT) news-vip (DOT) optusnet.com.au...
In article <aJ6xj.19789$421.15994 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au>,
"rf" <rf (AT) invalid (DOT) com> wrote:

"dorayme" <doraymeRidThis (AT) optusnet (DOT) com.au> wrote in message
news:doraymeRidThis-48E54C.16342527022008 (AT) news-vip (DOT) optusnet.com.au...

It is possible and it does make sense but you still should use a
table because it makes more sense to do this. It is like this. If
you are discouraged from using a hammer and well-aimed chisel on
an accessible-by-spanner nut, this does not mean that you should
use a hammer and chisel on an accessible-by-spanner nut on a
motor bike or boat or washing machine.

What?

I am not going to explain this! Unless you put up some dough and
we have a fair referee (how about Luigi?) that you get it back if
I cannot make the analogy good. <g

There *must* be some words missing. The paragraph appears to be incomplete
and self contradictory. No wonder the OP is confused :-)

Lets see, maybe you are right, maybe you are wrong. Let us parse
it together.

Before we begin, please everybody, get off your knees! I said
"parse" not "pray. Geez!

OP said "If it is not possible, or does not make sense, then I
will use table, but I thought it was discouraged to do so."

I then said:

"It is possible and it does make sense but you still should use a
table because it makes more sense to do this. It is like this."

No trouble there, surely?

"If you are discouraged from using a hammer and well-aimed chisel
on an accessible-by-spanner nut,"

An *in*accessible-by-spanner nut would be one which is hard to
get at and needing other than a spanner. OK?

Other than a spanner would be, for example, a chisel angled and
placed carefully on the nut and whacked with a hammer to loosen
the thing. No one would advise this brutality towards a nut that
was easily accessible by spanner. Right? It would be correct to
discourage such a thing. Just as we tend to advise people not to
use a table when other means of laying out non-tabular data are
to be had. The other means are the spanner.

So now you are invited to suppose in the sentence at this point
that you have been so discouraged while working on your car. The
car being a context.

"this does not mean that you should use a hammer and chisel on an
accessible-by-spanner nut on a motor bike or boat or washing
machine".

At this point, Richard, I concede an unhappiness in my writing. I
could have done this better. OK?

But it still makes sense, it is not contradictory. OP, having
been advised not to use tables in one context seems to think that
when the context changes a bit (laying out forms from laying out
other divisions of a webpage) the good advice to use tables for
tabular data and not otherwise does not apply any more. The
advice that was applicable to a car is also applicable to a
washing machine in respect to the tools for nuts.

--
dorayme