IlDemonlI Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 So I was just wondering why you chose to stick to making the entire site as a Table. o.O http://www.chromaticsites.com/blog/13-reasons-why-css-is-superior-to-tables-in-website-design/ If you're being chased by a police dog, try not to go through a tunnel, then on to a little seesaw, then jump through a hoop of fire. They're trained for that! -- Milton Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sy_Accursed Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Does it really matter? A "box" of content is a box of content whether you make it from table tags, div tags, pure css, flash, java or w/e And on a site like tip.it you need tables of data presented cleanly and simply; there's no need to go off on reams of css coding not everyone would be able to work with when the end visual result, for easy of use, will just looke like a basic table anyway. Operation Gold Sparkles :: Chompy Kills :: Full Profound :: Champions :: Barbarian Notes :: Champions Tackle Box :: MA RewardsDragonkin Journals :: Ports Stories :: Elder Chronicles :: Boss Slayer :: Penance King :: Kal'gerion Titles :: Gold Statue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlDemonlI Posted November 20, 2011 Author Share Posted November 20, 2011 Well, because the current method involves embedding tables into tables.. this method of development was outdated years ago with the introduction of CSS. Tables are exclusively meant for displaying data - not for styling. Bad habits are just bad habits. If you're being chased by a police dog, try not to go through a tunnel, then on to a little seesaw, then jump through a hoop of fire. They're trained for that! -- Milton Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obfuscator Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I agree with you, but often tables can be created much more easily so it can be a fair bit of work to use CSS to achieve the same thing. I do think it should be done eventually though as CSS certainly is preferable. "It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sy_Accursed Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I always find css more of a pain in the butt than necessary because not all the tags work with all the browsers to much more noticeable degree than html. So you end up with these big strings tht check browser and execute different lines of code dependant on what browser u got. Operation Gold Sparkles :: Chompy Kills :: Full Profound :: Champions :: Barbarian Notes :: Champions Tackle Box :: MA RewardsDragonkin Journals :: Ports Stories :: Elder Chronicles :: Boss Slayer :: Penance King :: Kal'gerion Titles :: Gold Statue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlDemonlI Posted November 20, 2011 Author Share Posted November 20, 2011 You're doing it wrong, then. o.-; I rarely run into that problem - or at least it's not that big of a deal to find a better, more efficient method that actually works on both. Further, it's safe to say that in some cases not all features will be available for all browsers. As long as there is no single browser, this will be an issue. Nothing you can do about that, other than working with it. Oh, and jQuery has a cleaner method with that. It's entirely unlikely for someone who plays Runescape to visit websites with their browser's JS handler off. If you're being chased by a police dog, try not to go through a tunnel, then on to a little seesaw, then jump through a hoop of fire. They're trained for that! -- Milton Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mil Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 We started this design over two years ago using fluid css grids. When we started to test some older, crappy browsers (specifically IE6 and IE7), it became nearly impossible to make things work without using tables. But now, 2 years on, we have technically dropped IE6 and IE7 support but we still kept the table structure. I don't think it'd be too hard to go back to not using tables, so maybe in the near future. And of course, I would also really prefer not to use tables in the layout :), but it had to be done back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sy_Accursed Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 The bane of my coding life was trying to make something scale width in css, Firefox liked width:100%.Opera read it but seemed to think 100%=50%Safari and IE just sort of imploded.Then trying to set a px size so thoose 2 worked Safari went to like EPIC SIDEWAYS SCROLLING, while IE was barely 300 wide. I don't think I ever did get it fully working. Operation Gold Sparkles :: Chompy Kills :: Full Profound :: Champions :: Barbarian Notes :: Champions Tackle Box :: MA RewardsDragonkin Journals :: Ports Stories :: Elder Chronicles :: Boss Slayer :: Penance King :: Kal'gerion Titles :: Gold Statue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlDemonlI Posted November 21, 2011 Author Share Posted November 21, 2011 I would comment on tips for making it work better - but I think this is neither the place or time for it. xD I'm assuming this was some time ago and learning now would be utterly useless. We started this design over two years ago using fluid css grids. I can't say I've ever heard the terminology... I've Googled it (when I read your post) and found a few people offering packages of it, but I've never heard it used. I would assume it functions similar to how the RuneVillage 2.0 release was.. we switched to a fixed width in 2.1 though. Sounds interesting enough, though; basically just columns, from what I'd read. Any news on the new Jagex website (with Wiki included)? Seems that'd have an effect on your release, unless you're confident new users will still choose you over the official wiki. If you're being chased by a police dog, try not to go through a tunnel, then on to a little seesaw, then jump through a hoop of fire. They're trained for that! -- Milton Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essiw Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I think the only real downside of tables (other then being outdated and messy) in webpages is that it makes it more difficult for blind people (divs are better for speaking programms then tables), but I doubt many blind people will be playing runescape at all. http://sign.tip.it/1/2/79/260/essiw.png Retired item crew I would like to be credited as essiw at the website update & corrections forum. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obfuscator Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I believe tables are also more expensive to render, although most modern browsers/computers don't have much of an issue. I think for mobile phones specifically tables can sometimes be an issue (ready.mobi recommends not using them, for instance). "It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now