Converting tables

Hello,
My sites were created primarily with tables as layout. :-(

I have two page designs which I used frequently and hopefully somebody can
provide some insight as to whether its best to remain with tables in CSS or
use an alternative.

The first page:
http://www.mi-harness.com/hof/0a0.html
Is part of a frames section, with 17 such pages A-Z. It is my desire to have
the thumbnails in line with the corresponding text and also to leave space
for additional thumbnails as this project progresses.

The second page:
http://www.mi-harness.com/SBreds/Reference.htm
Of nested tables with sub-category headings, I've used frequently. These
second types of pages are primarily links with little content.

Thanks in advance

lostinspace wrote:

My sites were created primarily with tables as layout. :-(

I have two page designs which I used frequently and hopefully
somebody can provide some insight as to whether its best to remain
with tables in CSS or use an alternative.

The first page:
http://www.mi-harness.com/hof/0a0.html

Why would you want to get rid of the table? It seems like a good use if
I understand it right. In the left cell, there is a description, in the
right the accompanying image.
As a rule-of-thumb: if you can find imaginary headings for your columns
and rows that fit all content in your cells, it's not the frowned-upon
"table-layout". Table-layout is when there is no connection between two
cells of a row or column, so that the positioning is arbirtrary if you
take away design choices like alignment.

Is part of a frames section, with 17 such pages A-Z. It is my desire
to have the thumbnails in line with the corresponding text and also
to leave space for additional thumbnails as this project progresses.

The second page:
http://www.mi-harness.com/SBreds/Reference.htm
Of nested tables with sub-category headings, I've used frequently.
These second types of pages are primarily links with little content.

Yes, that's an example of table-misuse.
Grouping the links into <h1>---<h2>---<h3> preceded <ul> categories
seems to make more sense. You can wrap navigation and content into
separate <div>s, one class "navigation", the other class "content".


--
Google Blogoscoped
http://blog.outer-court.com

From: "Philipp Lenssen" <>
Newsgroups: comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: Converting tables

lostinspace wrote:


My sites were created primarily with tables as layout. :-(

I have two page designs which I used frequently and hopefully
somebody can provide some insight as to whether its best to remain
with tables in CSS or use an alternative.

The first page:
http://www.mi-harness.com/hof/0a0.html

Why would you want to get rid of the table? It seems like a good use if
I understand it right. In the left cell, there is a description, in the
right the accompanying image.
As a rule-of-thumb: if you can find imaginary headings for your columns
and rows that fit all content in your cells, it's not the frowned-upon
"table-layout". Table-layout is when there is no connection between two
cells of a row or column, so that the positioning is arbirtrary if you
take away design choices like alignment.

Is part of a frames section, with 17 such pages A-Z. It is my desire
to have the thumbnails in line with the corresponding text and also
to leave space for additional thumbnails as this project progresses.

The second page:
http://www.mi-harness.com/SBreds/Reference.htm
Of nested tables with sub-category headings, I've used frequently.
These second types of pages are primarily links with little content.


Yes, that's an example of table-misuse.
Grouping the links into <h1>---<h2>---<h3> preceded <ul> categories
seems to make more sense. You can wrap navigation and content into
separate <div>s, one class "navigation", the other class "content".


--
Google Blogoscoped
http://blog.outer-court.com

Many thanks Philipp/George