Tabless Template and vB 3.8

[Jobe1986]

So far the only reason I've seen that even remotely comes close to a reason suitable for not using tables is that "some browsers dont render the page until they have the whole table". To those I say, what about the browsers who dont render any part of the page until they have the whole page? Should vBulletin stop using HTML because of that?

Anyway my point is, so very many people say "tables" are bad, and I'm yet to see one of them give a valid reason why. Tables are tables, there is nothing ANYWHERE that says they should only be used for tabular date. And as it happens, layout is something theyre good at. So since nothing says tables shouldnt be used for layout except for the ill informed opinion of a minority of people, why SHOULDNT tables be used for something theyre good at? For something that theyre more reliable between browsers at doing.

[gamestar]

I agree with semantic html.
However as zachary said, that's not the same as tableless.
I think the forum/thread overview should remain a table, nothing wrong with that.

[smackLAN]

Div spaghetti is just as bad as nested tables at the end of the day.

haha...very true!

[TWTCommish]

I'm all for CSS-based designs, but yeah, the table-hate can be pretty ridiculous. Non-semantic markup isn't exactly the end of the world, particularly if it's temporary, as we're not in a position to fully utilize it yet, anyway.

The only site that I have seen use this is http://www.ayyas.com/

And it's probably one of the best sites I have ever seen

The only site to use tableless design? Really? There are tons.

Anyway, it's a fine design, but I wouldn't even rank it among the top 100 best layouts I've seen. And it needs some further debugging; the dropdown menu attached to the "Community" link doesn't work properly in IE6.

[jmurrayhead]

Div speghetti is just as bad as nested tables at the end of the day.

Think of the size difference:

<table>
    <tr>
        <td>Some HTML here</td>
    </tr>
</table>

versus:

<div>
    Some html here
</div>

Not the greatest example...but if you have a whole bunch of tables versus a few divs, there can be a considerable difference is size.

So far the only reason I've seen that even remotely comes close to a reason suitable for not using tables is that "some browsers dont render the page until they have the whole table". To those I say, what about the browsers who dont render any part of the page until they have the whole page? Should vBulletin stop using HTML because of that?

Anyway my point is, so very many people say "tables" are bad, and I'm yet to see one of them give a valid reason why. Tables are tables, there is nothing ANYWHERE that says they should only be used for tabular date. And as it happens, layout is something theyre good at. So since nothing says tables shouldnt be used for layout except for the ill informed opinion of a minority of people, why SHOULDNT tables be used for something theyre good at? For something that theyre more reliable between browsers at doing.

Scroll down to "Guideline 5. Create tables that transform gracefully"

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/

[feldon23]

Div speghetti is just as bad as nested tables at the end of the day.

Give it a rest!

Have you been to http://www.csszengarden.com/ ?

If you take the average person and sit them down at CSS Zen Garden and have them flip through 20-30 different styles ask them "Do you realize this is one web page with different styles?" they will tell you that you are insane, but that is now CSS is supposed to work. Cascading Style Sheet means that the CSS defines the layout and the style, not the HTML.


With DIV tags and good names, you can add rounded corners, completely change layout, add drop shadows, etc. without making a million changes to the templates. Put everything in DIV (except the actual list of forums/threads/posts) and you can completely change how the forum pages look without hacking up HTML templates.

Why do you think so many vBulletin forums look the same? Because it is a huge amount of work to change it and then have to keep making those changes every time a new vBulletin comes out. I do not want to do a comparison on 30 templates every time I upgrade vB, but I would if I want a new look. It would have to be a paid job to keep up with vBulletin changes.


Yes, it is a new way of thinking, that your DIV tags are not semantic and their structure and layout are defined by an external file (CSS), but for professional forum and CMS and Blog, this is the way it has to go.


47% Internet Explorer 7
21% Firefox 2 & 3
20% Internet Explorer 6
9% Safari, Chrome, Opera, Internet Explorer 8

That's 77% of the browser market now substantially XHTML/CSS standards compliant. There is no reason to wait anymore to do awesome CSS.

[Dilly]

Give it a rest!

Have you been to http://www.csszengarden.com/ ?

If you take the average person and sit them down at CSS Zen Garden and have them flip through 20-30 different styles ask them "Do you realize this is one web page with different styles?" they will tell you that you are insane, but that is now CSS is supposed to work. Cascading Style Sheet means that the CSS defines the layout and the style, not the HTML.


With DIV tags and good names, you can add rounded corners, completely change layout, add drop shadows, etc. without making a million changes to the templates. Put everything in DIV (except the actual list of forums/threads/posts) and you can completely change how the forum pages look without hacking up HTML templates.

Why do you think so many vBulletin forums look the same? Because it is a huge amount of work to change it and then have to keep making those changes every time a new vBulletin comes out. I do not want to do a comparison on 30 templates every time I upgrade vB, but I would if I want a new look. It would have to be a paid job to keep up with vBulletin changes.


Yes, it is a new way of thinking, that your DIV tags are not semantic and their structure and layout are defined by an external file (CSS), but for professional forum and CMS and Blog, this is the way it has to go.


47% Internet Explorer 7
21% Firefox 2 & 3
20% Internet Explorer 6
9% Safari, Chrome, Opera, Internet Explorer 8

That's 77% of the browser market now substantially XHTML/CSS standards compliant. There is no reason to wait anymore to do awesome CSS.

Someone missed the point...

[feldon23]

The point is when someone brings up getting rid of a good chunk of the tables in vBulletin, a few folks step in and try to defend using tables for everything.

The more DIV tags and less tables you use, the more you are allowing the CSS to define the layout and structure of the page, giving more power to the user.

[golfer adam]

The more DIV tags and less tables you use, the more you are allowing the CSS to define the layout and structure of the page, giving more power to the user.

I agree with this. I think that CSS is the way forward and is the future so why stick with tables when they aren't really that necessary. And Div spaghetti only becomes Div spaghetti if you let it.

[Reeve of Shinra]

I agree with Feldon completely on this... its not about div speghetti or removing tables but completing the seperation of style vs content.

[Dilly]

The point is when someone brings up getting rid of a good chunk of the tables in vBulletin, a few folks step in and try to defend using tables for everything.

The more DIV tags and less tables you use, the more you are allowing the CSS to define the layout and structure of the page, giving more power to the user.

Look up DIV spaghetti.

It's not about using more DIVs at all. It's about using the correct element, which may or may not be a div.

[Jobe1986]

Look up DIV spaghetti.

It's not about using more DIVs at all. It's about using the correct element, which may or may not be a div.

To add to that, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Span_and_div#Overuse

People most often use <div>'s when they really dont need to and it's slowly becoming a craze by these people to form the opinion that <div>'s are the ONLY tag that should be used for formatting.

Designing a good web page and it's HTML is not about making it easy to style, but making it render the same to everyone. Users viewing a web page don't care if you've used <div>'s, tables, or hell even a combination of XML and XSL. AS long as the page is formatted as THEY see it they don't care how you achieved the result. So why faff about using <div>'s and over complicated CSS to do something, that you can much more easily do in other ways such as tables.

And if you really want to use only <div>'s then there's nothing to stop you doing that already. So instead of complaining that vBulletin does not already have a table less style, make one, show Jelsoft how it can be done. And if you can't do it yourself, then in all honesty I would say that in my opinion, you're not qualified enough to even have an opinion on using <div>'s vs tables.

Also, since the thread authors question has already been answered, I believe this thread has gone way off topic.

[gamestar]

The point is when someone brings up getting rid of a good chunk of the tables in vBulletin, a few folks step in and try to defend using tables for everything.

The more DIV tags and less tables you use, the more you are allowing the CSS to define the layout and structure of the page, giving more power to the user.

No, that's not the point of what zachary was saying.
He wasn't saying he prefers tables over divs, he was trying to say you need to use tables where it's appropriate to use them.
So not for the menu, where you should use a list structure. But for things like the thread overview, which clearly has a table structure, it's preferable to use tables...
Tables are specifically designed to be used for tabular data, divs are not.

The key point is to make a semantic html page, with the right use of all elements: h1/2/3 elements, lists, tables, ....

And because csszengarden doesn't have tabular data, there are no tables in the html code ...

[jmurrayhead]

Look up DIV spaghetti.

It's not about using more DIVs at all. It's about using the correct element, which may or may not be a div.

I agree. When I first posted, I was just using <div> as an example. Indeed, the correct element should be used. The point I'm getting to is that tables typically aren't the correct element for much of what they are being used for in vBulletin. My link from W3C shows that.

To add to that, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Span_and_div#Overuse

People most often use <div>'s when they really dont need to and it's slowly becoming a craze by these people to form the opinion that <div>'s are the ONLY tag that should be used for formatting.

This is true...I don't know of a single tag that can't have CSS applied to it to change the appearance.

Designing a good web page and it's HTML is not about making it easy to style, but making it render the same to everyone. Users viewing a web page don't care if you've used <div>'s, tables, or hell even a combination of XML and XSL. AS long as the page is formatted as THEY see it they don't care how you achieved the result. So why faff about using <div>'s and over complicated CSS to do something, that you can much more easily do in other ways such as tables.

Again, it's true that user's don't care how it's done, just that it appears correct for them. But as the link I posted earlier explains (from W3C), tables should be avoided for layout purposes unless they can be properly linearized. I don't know where vBulletin falls within being linearized, however. Regardless, for people who have to use screen readers, table layouts may pose a problem for them.

[Jobe1986]

I don't know where vBulletin falls within being linearized, however. Regardless, for people who have to use screen readers, table layouts may pose a problem for them.

vBulletin's default style, well at least the one used here CAN be linearized. The text based web browser lynx can be used to show this well, as it doesnt even support tables or frames, but when loaded, this vBulletin forum here, and most others, are still very obviously easy to read and understand.