CSS Layout.

[Aksumka]

Well, I finally did it! One entire page, nothing but CSS!

I would just like to know if I did everything right, or if there is something that I should fix. I can and will make an external CSS file, but not now. I have tested with FF 2.0, IE7, and Opera. I did a browsershot.org for Safari, and it looks good, but I don't know if it works well (don't see why it wouldn't). So if there is a problem please tell me what it is and maybe what to do about.

Link!

[Mister-Mind]

<3 I totally LOVE IT!

[Momo-the-Monkey]

Well congratulations! It's always nice to have a job well done eh? Good job on it. Maybe you could change up the header picture, make it smaller..and less cluttered...but that's only a preference....

Anyway, Good job on the code! I loved it!

[Jessii]

At 11/30/06 09:35 PM, Momo-the-Monkey wrote: Maybe you could change up the header picture, make it smaller..

looks good to me and I agree with momo on the header. You shouldn't have to scroll too much to get to content.

[Bizarro]

looks good, the only thing is that it looks like you have more divs than needed for what the layout is. I could be wrong though I didn't really look at it too hard cuz its bedtime now

[different]

<div align="center"> is depreciated... You can use text-align:[left, center, right] instead, much less hassle.

[h4x3r]

Hey! thats really good! except i would make it with more organized divs, (only use tables to show tabular data!) and dont give divs a border, and maybe make them a slightly lighter/darker shade of the bg:
#div1 {
background:#hexhere;
position:absolute;
width:widthhere;
height:heighthere;
}

[Jessii]

At 12/1/06 10:15 AM, h4x3r wrote: Hey! thats really good! except i would make it with more organized divs, (only use tables to show tabular data!)

No. That's not true! They're good for layouts but not for the entire thing. All forums are built with tables, that's not exactly tabular data. Besides, it's his site, he can do what he wants.

[h4x3r]

yes, Jessi i know, but tables were originally used to display data, not pictures (w3.org). so dont use tables to make a layout, use divs.

[Jessii]

At 12/1/06 10:43 AM, h4x3r wrote: yes, Jessi i know, but tables were originally used to display data, not pictures (w3.org). so dont use tables to make a layout, use divs.

It doesn't matter. It works for what he wants and like I said, it's his site, he can do what he wants as far as what he's comfortable with. Tables are a little slower but then again css can also get kind of slow too.

[Jordan]

At 12/1/06 10:43 AM, h4x3r wrote: yes, Jessi i know, but tables were originally used to display data, not pictures (w3.org).

<img> is used to display pictures...

so dont use tables to make a layout, use divs.

People can use whatever they won't, don't give us your "You must do what i say" shit.

[h4x3r]

Jess, its always funny how i Always get stuck arguing with you! anyway, CSS is the right way to do it, tables work, but thats not what they were make for. ok, thats it! theres nothing to argue about that!

[Jessii]

At 12/1/06 10:48 AM, Jordan wrote:

so dont use tables to make a layout, use divs.

People can use whatever they won't, don't give us your "You must do what i say" shit.

I'm always arguing with him because he seems to only think that you can do things one way and not another. I say, do what you can with what you know. It works either way. Divs are harder to position and work with in IE, especially IE 6, so with that said IE 6 doesn't handle divs inside of divs all that well. So I say screw it and use a table if it gives you the result that you were looking for. It's not a big deal and I don't know why people make such a big deal about it. Designwise, tables kick ass! (BTW, if you slice a layout in photoshop and you save it, it's saved in a table, not a div).

[DearonElensar]

At 12/1/06 10:50 AM, h4x3r wrote: Jess, its always funny how i Always get stuck arguing with you! anyway, CSS is the right way to do it, tables work, but thats not what they were make for. ok, thats it! theres nothing to argue about that!

That they aren't meant to do something doesn't mean that you shouldn't do it.
Flash wasn't meant to make games with for example, but that changed allot with time.
I mean people are now using css to do what tables should do.
Nobody should care how you do it as long as you follow the standards on the tags you use and it works.

[Gutya]

At 12/1/06 10:36 AM, Jessii wrote: All forums are built with tables, that's not exactly tabular data. Besides, it's his site, he can do what he wants.

Nope, I made a rough forum concept that used pure CSS and no tables.

[Jordan]

At 12/1/06 04:07 PM, Gutya wrote: Nope, I made a rough forum concept that used pure CSS and no tables.

Off topic, but what is with the new account?

[Gutya]

At 12/1/06 04:11 PM, Jordan wrote:

At 12/1/06 04:07 PM, Gutya wrote: Nope, I made a rough forum concept that used pure CSS and no tables.

Off topic, but what is with the new account?

Got bored.

[Jessii]

At 12/1/06 04:07 PM, Gutya wrote: Nope, I made a rough forum concept that used pure CSS and no tables.

You can do that but it's so much easier to use tables. You can always convert it but then again you'd have to code all of that css, which will make it run at about the same performance rate.

[Gutya]

I found it easier to manage than tables.

It also makes your forum alot more customisable with themes etc.

[Bizarro]

I appoint myself arbiter because I'm feeling arrogant today:

In the case of Jess and h4x3r I find both sides victorious. h4x3r is very correct and justified in saying that tables shouldn't be used for anything but tabular data it is true that it is not their intended use, and in this case he doesn't fall into the category of "asshole" because it wasn't unwarranted due to the thread being about pure css-p design. On the other hand Jess is also correct in saying that the intended use doesn't have the be the only use, hell I used a penny as a screwdriver yesterday. Many people use tables for whatever the hell they feel like and thats fine unless your trying to meet up to standards

P.S. Forms fall under the category of non-tabular data and should be displayed with other tags such as fieldsets lists and labels

(not intended to by assy of me, just wanted to clear stuffs up)

[smulse]

Nice. How did you do the header image?

[Aksumka]

At 12/2/06 09:24 AM, Smulse wrote: Nice. How did you do the header image?

Photoshop brushes and simple layer effects.

[AFAR]

cool....

[smulse]

I should really buy myself a copy of photoshop.

[Jordan]

At 12/2/06 01:24 PM, Smulse wrote: I should really buy myself a copy of photoshop.

An alternative is GIMP, which is free.

[smulse]

Sounds like a fair alternative, but I like the fact that with Photoshop you can just go download loads of new brushes and effects. Theres not as big a selection of addons for GIMP.

[different]

At 12/1/06 04:21 PM, Jessii wrote:

At 12/1/06 04:07 PM, Gutya wrote: Nope, I made a rough forum concept that used pure CSS and no tables.

You can do that but it's so much easier to use tables. You can always convert it but then again you'd have to code all of that css, which will make it run at about the same performance rate.

"so much easier to use tables" - yes, based on your experience, not objective fact. Tables gave me such a headache that when I started designing I had to resort to table wysiwyg editors to simply generate the code for me. Same performance rate - Based on what?? Stylesheets are cached, so the browser doesn't have to download the layout again (which is what tables force you to do), divs are leaner than tables (<table><tr><td>*content*</td></tr></table> as opposed to <div>*content*</div>) and divs are more futureproof - i.e. internet browsing on portable devices that can't handle large amounts of data: i.e tables, restyling websites for portable devices etc.

Bottom line. Tables for layout? You're stuck in the past.

[Jessii]

At 12/3/06 02:10 PM, different wrote: Bottom line. Tables for layout? You're stuck in the past.

Do I have any tables on my website? I don't think so. Plenty of people use tables because they take an image ready sliced image and plug it in because they don't know css. So what? They can do it either way. It's up to that person.

[different]

At 12/3/06 02:28 PM, Jessii wrote: Plenty of people use tables because they take an image ready sliced image and plug it in because they don't know css. So what? They can do it either way. It's up to that person.

It's thinking like that that will keep us stuck in the past. It's like saying OMG LOL I CAN ECHO MY HTML PAGE THROUGH PHP LOL and echoing your entire page through php when you don't need to.

Bad habits stick - and I see new upcoming designers are very proficient at the old methods - somewhere along the way the teacher has been teaching their outdated methods..

I can't repeat enough how efficient divs are for transforming a layout into a whole new one (ala css Zen garden) - 'slicing' using tables is inefficient and the same thing can be acheived much simpler using css... You (and any other table based designer) should know this.