Tables & CSS vs. Pure CSS

[Fwks08]

Which do you recommend? Tables with css for images, text, and to define the tables, or pure css for the entire layout?

I've checked Microsoft's source code and it's made with tables. I wonder why they would do that when css is becoming increasingly powerful and popular.

Microsoft is a leading company in terms of technology, so why would they implement the use of tables, which is quite old and was never designed for the way it is used?

[Not_My_Style]

Pure CSS for the entire layout is what I prefer. Although that's a lot harder to code and takes a lot more time. It's much easier to change the design that way though.

[Sixty]

I prefer pure css for the entire layout. It takes longer and is more difficult to set up, but it ends up much more efficient and easier to modify, as stated before.

[Fwks08]

Great, thanks. No one has vouched for CSS & Tables, yet.

[rijulraju]

Actually, if done properly CSS & tables aren't that bad at all. You can still maintain the look while not loosing it's flexibility.

[Fwks08]

Does it take more knowledge, effort, time, and application to "put" CSS & Tables on the same level as Pure CSS? I mean, do you have to work more to keep the flexbility when using CSS & Tables?

[sjaguar13]

I'm for tables and CSS all the way!

There are plenty of reason why pure CSS isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread. First, everyone says how much easier it is to change the layout. Did you ever try making a site in pure CSS? I have several, but they are all really basic layouts. You cannot even begin to do anything complicated because CSS isn't standard across all web browsers.

Each browser supports CSS, but there is no definition of what the browser is actually supposed to do. You mix in ALL the versions of IE, then you have FireFox and the rest of the Mozilla family, though in Opera, and then get crazy with Safari on Mac...you end up with so many CSS hacks, partial comments, box tricks, and everything else just to get a simple design.

Next, how many times did you need to completely redo everything? You have to spend a boat-load of time to get the CSS to show up properly to have the ability to "change everything with ease". No one really ever does this and it's not easy. All the hacks you had to do to get it to show up right in the first place now get in the way. This whole theory is a benefit not worth having.

Also, there is the whole argument about smaller file size/less code. Look at any CSS site and you will see not only the div tags, but a big block of CSS. Even if the CSS is pulled out into another file, the div tags don't really cut down the file size compared to td and tr tags.

Finally there are the limitations. You cannot have a 3 column design that has an image on both end columns that remains equal hight no matter how much text is in each column. Another thing that annoys the crap out of me is the overlapping. Instead of the table pushing out to the side forcing a side ways scroll, all the text appear on top of each other making it impossible to read. I prefer the side way scroll because it's at least readable.

I say make a CSS design if you can, but tables are just as good. My simple fixed-width layouts with a header image at the top, a menu and content area underneath and then a footer are CSS. Anything else is tables with regret.