CSS and Tables: The hype and the trends
The History of tables
Before tables came along, the web was a pretty dull place. Using
tables for layout opened up new vistas of possibilities of
visually "designing" a page. It could well be argued that table
based layout was responsible for the popularity of the web and
the field of web design.
Worse still, over the last few years, table based layout has
come under severe criticism and was widely demonized. Web
purists claim that tables were never meant for layout so one
shouldn't use them for such. A rapidly progressive hype seems to
be in the air all around.
Reality behind the hype
Despite the fact that pioneers have been talking about web
standards for a long time, the majority of web sites are still
developed using tables and non standards compliant code .
History has shown many examples of technologies that started out
life with one purpose, only to end up finding more practical
applications as something else. And it sounds very apt in case
of tables. The web itself was never intended to be a channel for
edutainment, marketing and information but for sharing research
data.
Using tables is a pragmatic approach, if not preferred
The W3c Web Accessibility Guidelines recognize that designers
will continue to use table for layout - and so include
information about how they can be implemented in the most
accessible way. Designers are not going to immediately stop
using tables for layout; mainly owning to the reason that this
is the default behavior of most WYSWYG (what you see is what you
get) Web design packages and; CSS for layout is so difficult to
implement successfully.
Moreover, Professionals still argue the use of tables for the
layout of pages on the Web, despite the fact that this goes
against current standards. They argue it to be a pragmatic
approach - if not their preferred options.
Let's explode the myths: CSS vs Tables
Most web designers don't simply feel the need to switch over
The majority of web sites are still developed using tables and
non standards compliant code. Because of this, user agents will
be forced to handle table based layouts for many years to come.
This effectively negates one of the biggest selling points for
web standards. That of forward compatibility. That's why, most
web designers really don't feel there is an overwhelming need to
start developing sites using CSS based layouts and standards
compliant code.
CSS development has a much higher barrier to entry than table
based design
While comparing table based design to CSS based design, the
syntax of CSS, for sure, turns out to be is pretty easy. Nobody
in their right mind would argue that you need too be a rocket
scientist to learn CSS. Nevertheless, some of the concepts can
be quite tricky to assimilate.
Continuing in the same spirit it is true that there are so many
bugs, even the "experts" find themselves spending an inordinate
amount of time bug fixing. For a novice this must be extremely
frustrating. Not knowing if the problem is down to your
misunderstanding of CSS or some obscure browser bug.
Perhaps this is why many people see web standards as "Ivory
Tower" and why many web standards advocates come across as
having a sense of superiority and a zealous attitude towards web
design.
Some things are just easy-to-do with tables
People often find themselves writing fairly complicated CSS to
do something that would be trivial using tables. Take form
styling for an instance. It's possible to lay out even very
tricky forms using tables in just a few minutes. You can achieve
similar results by floating elements with CSS, but it's a lot
more involved. If you're a CSS guru it's all part of the fun.
However if you're a regular mortal, it can be incredibly
frustrating.
Another such thing is page footers. It's pretty easy to do using
tables. Whilst doing this using CSS alone, it would hardly be
any wonder why web developers turn their back on CSS when even
simple things are rendered so
If you have the knowledge and patience, you can do most things
using CSS that you used to do using tables. Sure it may take you
longer, but you'll get there in the end (or die trying).
CSS benefits. But does it provide you what you need?
It's true that switching a large site to a CSS based layout can
save a huge amount of bandwidth. However, for most sites, this
saving would be insignificant or mostly irrevelent.
People want fast loading pages and many advocates have suggested
that CSS helps accomplish this. For most sites, the "design" is
spread evenly across the whole site. However with CSS based
sites, the "design" is usually held in one or more external
files. These files can be fairly complicated, and even for a
simple site, can get big, or even fast.
Search engine friendliness: CSS vs Tables
It's true that the search engines like semantic pages. It's also
a widely held notion that search engines like lean code.
Building a site using CSS and web standards can defiantly
encourage the development of search engine friendly sites.
However it's neither magic bullet, nor a panacea either.
There are many table based sites that score very highly in the
search engines. It's equally possible to build a CSS based site
that gets a terrible search engine ranking. The most important
thing for high ranking is content and inbound links, not whether
a site uses tables or CSS for layout.
Issues pertaining to accessibility
There is quite increasing number of people who try to sell web
standards and especially CSS based design by playing on client's
accessibility fears.
There isn't anything inherently inaccessible about table based
design. While it's true that your site needs to be published to
a recognised set of grammars to get an AA accessibility rating,
tableless design is only a recommendation, not a requirement for
the more stringent AAA rating.
The final word
Final Table based design will be around for a long time.
However, it is not good enough just to say that it is wrong to
use them . In certain circumstances using tables for layout can
make much more sense than CSS.
Web standards and CSS based design are defiantly the way
forward. However in the rush to advocate these "new" techniques,
people end up being hyperbolic and the reality falls short of
expectations.
A sensible approach to get what you continue to seek is the need
of the hour regardless of what is in vogue, or blown out of
proportions.