Proposed Web site redesign (beta)

[Jason Clinton]

Gerald Combs wrote:
> What is it about tables that causes browsing in PDAs and cell phones to
> fail?  Why would this cause more trouble for blind users?

Not fail. Presented as a useless stream of text and fields with no 
context or headings giving meaning or structure to the document.

> ...but I don't want absolute positioning.  Here's my abbreviated RFC:

I'll do a Mozilla compatible mock-up this weekend. It should only take 
me about an hour or two to have the box model you want completed. The 
trick is to use 'min-width: ' on your page body. Again, IE 
not-with-standing.

> Check out http://www.plone.org/.  First, read the content.  You'll find
> that they're all about the semantic web, standards compliance, and
> accessibility.  Now, look at the source.  They're using tables.

Yes, this supports your argument. However, their pages do not pass Bobby 
and while they might have been able to hide the semantic meaning with 
'display: hidden;' from visual browsers, I think that this is asking for 
trouble. The other benefit to CSS is that it acts as a template 
seperating style from content -- they've lost that benefit by resorting 
to tables. CSS -- once it's been designed -- can really save you time on 
your maintenance.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 256 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/attachments/20041112/b01e4c60/signature-0002.pgp