UxMag

I agree, if it takes you more than 47 minutes to get just the layout right with CSS, you need to get better at CSS or give up. They obviously think you need to give up instead of get better at it. Whatever works for you, I guess.

I guess you can apply this to programming as well! Everyone be lazy and write terrible and fragile code if you can’t figure it out! At least it works, right? Bill those clients, bill ‘em good.

I think I prefer to get better with CSS than give up and use tables. Doesn’t mean I don’t like Table Layout .. but I prefer using table just for displaying data.

This is ridiculous. In 2008 no one should be using tables for layout. We shouldn’t even be talking about this subject.

@Rollo Amen!

I can’t even believe people are still holding onto tables with such religious zeal. It reminds me of the users who would not let Quark go in the print world. People learn something and never want to learn anything else ever again for the rest of their lives.

Sometimes, with all the CSS hacks, tricks etc. I doubt its worth to religiously go with CSS, only for the pleasure of a CSS validator. The idea of the separation of layout is good in theory, but with the browser variaty its far from optimal.

I know I’m going out on a limb here, but, yeah… KM has got it right.

Anyway, true feeling is that this is more of a humorous answer to shouldiusetablesforlayout.com than an actual attempt to persuade people NOT to use CSS.

Anybody knows the numbers replica handbags
replica bagsofin CA, I need to call them and get my bag repaired.