Waspman
Posts: 948
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 1:13 AM |
|
After many years of using CCS for applications and websites I’m about to jump ship…
Why? – Table-less layouts!
I have struggled for a long time with CCS and CSS, but this seems to be the final straw.
I appreciate that tables are right in certain places and I would continue to use CCS for apps and things like stock lists etc. But a large amount of my work (websites) will have to be done in some other tool.
Is there any hope?
_________________
http://www.waspmedia.co.uk |
 |
 |
JimmyCrackedCorn
Posts: 583
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 2:17 AM |
|
are you saying you like table-less layouts or dislike them?
a table is a tool. CSS is a tool. if I can get from point A to point B quicker using a tried and true method (tables) I will do so! if it adds 1k to my HTML...I don't care! the great thing about tables is they work as expected in all major browsers. and I know them inside and out.
when CSS serves me better then I use it. when tables serve me better then I use them! my customers don't know one from the other and their end-users could not care less.
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
Waspman
Posts: 948
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 4:57 AM |
|
Agreed, but
I am up against other companies who claim that being standard complient is the right/only way. For better accessable sites and better SEO.
All my competitor's sites are tableless.
I too would prefer to stay with tables, but...
_________________
http://www.waspmedia.co.uk |
|
|
|
JimmyCrackedCorn
Posts: 583
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 1:40 PM |
|
be careful how much hype you buy into! we have achieved top-ranked sites using layout tables in our sites. and we routinely deliver section 508 compliance (as well as other more stringent standards) again with sites that use tables for layout.
but I certainly understand if your customers have bought the argument already. it can be impossible to change their minds once someone has convinced them of something!
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
ckroon
Posts: 869
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 3:25 PM |
|
I read a post by Peterr about this.. along the same lines. He was arguing that the Biggies like yahoo and Gmail use tables...how else can you keep the complicated stuff in line?
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
ckroon
Posts: 869
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 3:27 PM |
|
Found the quote....he makes a lot of sense:
Quote :4. Using only <div>'s seems to be a utopian goal. I hear so many people talking about this but when I ask them to name any professional portal system that uses only <div>'s then they are unable to provide one. Please simply try to find any company on the Internet with a portal that uses only div's. http://news.google.com/ uses tables. http://finance.yahoo.com/ uses tables. http://www.amazon.com/ uses tables. http://www.oracle.com/index.html uses tables.
Only http://www.yahoo.com/ uses only one table, but their style definition is so huge that I'm not sure how many people can decipher it and actually use it on their Website. And their blocks/forms are simply square, without rounded corners which would require tables...
Therefore I think <div>'s can be used to some extent with simple and pre-defined page layouts but there is no way to use only <div's> with predictable results for such broad and extensive applications as our customers create with CodeCharge Studio.
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
marcwolf
Posts: 361
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 3:30 PM |
|
Hi
Tables can be a curse or a blessing depending on how they are used.
One site I had to work on the developer used tables but has set all of them into actual pixel sized rather than percentages. this site proved to be a nightmare to maintain.
On the other hand I have had to work on Style Sheet orientated websites and likewise found that the original developer had made some very bad decidions.
HTML layout is an artform in its own right. We need to make websites that are professional, pleasing to the eye, and can be used quickly and efficiently. And this is both on a t=internet and a intranet basis.
But mainly it comes down to the person doing the generating. If you do not get the foundations of a webpage working correctly then you will have made a burden for yourself and any other programmer to follow.
Just my viewpoints.
Dave
_________________
' Coding Coding Coding
Keep Those Keyboards Coding.
Raw Code!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
wkempees
Posts: 1679
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 3:31 PM |
|
Good one Dave.
Does everybody know the width="*"
www.csszengarden.com, beauty in CSS styling
No tabular data there though, so <div>.
Walter
Not joining the discussion but enjoying it, though.
_________________
Origin: NL, T:GMT+1 (Forumtime +9)
CCS3/4.01.006 PhP, MySQL .Net/InMotion(Vista/XP, XAMPP)
if you liked this info PAYPAL me: http://donate.consultair.eu
|
|
|
|
JimmyCrackedCorn
Posts: 583
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 4:25 PM |
|
Quote ckroon:
Found the quote....he makes a lot of sense:
Quote :4. Using only <div>'s seems to be a utopian goal. I hear so many people talking about this but when I ask them to name any professional portal system that uses only <div>'s then they are unable to provide one. Please simply try to find any company on the Internet with a portal that uses only div's. http://news.google.com/ uses tables. http://finance.yahoo.com/ uses tables. http://www.amazon.com/ uses tables. http://www.oracle.com/index.html uses tables.
Only http://www.yahoo.com/ uses only one table, but their style definition is so huge that I'm not sure how many people can decipher it and actually use it on their Website. And their blocks/forms are simply square, without rounded corners which would require tables...
Therefore I think <div>'s can be used to some extent with simple and pre-defined page layouts but there is no way to use only <div's> with predictable results for such broad and extensive applications as our customers create with CodeCharge Studio.
I'll go ahead and state the obvious! :)
If these mega-companies with unlimited resources do not choose to dump tables then why in the world should I (a small struggling developer!) try and achieve some utopian standard?
<putting on my consumer hat>
I just want to do my business and move along. I don't care if you use tables, CSS, Flash or whatever just as long as I can do my business without your web site getting in the way!
</hat off>
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
Waspman
Posts: 948
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 11:08 PM |
|
Jimmy - I'm not buying into the hype as such; although the internet seems to be built on it so it's difficult not to get sucked in. I just want to be competitive, if it makes a difference to be tableless, if I win more work...
CKroon - Yeah, I can't see how you would make that much content behave without tables
Dave - well I generate everything in CCS - but I'm a designer and I do whatever it takes to get the job done, if it works etc. But having just converted a couple of pages to tableless, there does seem to be some compromise. Maybe that's why all these tableless, fully compliant sites have a similar look? (like the sites we produced 10 years ago)
Walter
Jimmy -
<putting on my customers hat >
I don't care if you use tables, CSS, Flash or whatever just as long as my web site appears on the front page of Google, attracts significant amounts of traffic and it delivers what my market wants</hat off>
Now, I built a website for the Toyota UK (name dropper) and it's 12 dealers a couple of years ago, it was full of tables and very unfriendly url's. But it and the dealer's sites dominated the front page of Google. The key as far as I was/am concerned was/is relevant content; no matter how neat and tidy the larder is, if there's no food in it?
But these standards compliant guys are on a mission. It would be different if there was definite proof.
Some of my competitors put forward the fact they produce standard compliant sites as one of their USP’s ??? – and they also claim to understand marketing.
I’m just starting to get my head round CCS (only taken 7 years) and someone’s moved the goal posts. When I consider the projects I have undertaken, not to mention the money I’ve made with CCS, it seems impossible to imagine my business without it.
Uncertainty rules OK!
T
_________________
http://www.waspmedia.co.uk |
|
|
|
Jan K. van Dalen
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 8:43 AM |
|
Actually, Yahoo main page has only a single table of no consequence.
The issue is not necesarly Tables vs. CSS but rather making CCS
applications SEO friendly ... it is hard ...
I had 1 application created in CCS / ASP pretty simple & clean and could not
improve in Google & Others to go up a single page (we where parked around
page 47).
As soon as I dumped the CCS app and move it to Joomla (yes I lost some
functionality) ... the next day we where in page 6 and has stayed there
(up/down 1 page) since then.
Maybe YesSoftware could publish some articles on how to achieve better SEO
with CCS.
"ckroon" <ckroon@forum.codecharge> wrote in message
news:2486022f84391d@news.codecharge.com...
>I read a post by Peterr about this.. along the same lines. He was arguing
>that
> the Biggies like yahoo and Gmail use tables...how else can you keep the
> complicated stuff in line?
> ---------------------------------------
> Sent from YesSoftware forum
> http://forums.yessoftware.com/
>
|
|
|
|
datadoit
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 12:32 PM |
|
CodeCharge is a tool to -make- web-enabled applications. -Make- your
web-enabled applications SEO friendly.
You're implying that your hammer needs to know the local building codes
before sinking the nail in the wrong place.
|
|
|
|
JimmyCrackedCorn
Posts: 583
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 2:50 PM |
|
Quote Jan K. van Dalen:
I had 1 application created in CCS / ASP pretty simple & clean and could not
improve in Google & Others to go up a single page (we where parked around
page 47).
As soon as I dumped the CCS app and move it to Joomla (yes I lost some
functionality) ... the next day we where in page 6 and has stayed there
(up/down 1 page) since then.
I find it hard to believe removing CCS was all it took to go from page 47 to page 6. there must have been other factors. maybe your site was due for a re-index and it coincided with the change or something.
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
Waspman
Posts: 948
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 2:59 PM |
|
CCS is a bit more than a hammer DD
This tool does much of the work for us, that's why we like it.
"-Make- your web-enabled applications SEO friendly." That's exactly what we want to do.
All Jan asked for was little guidance. Don't be so aggressive
Were all love CCS here!
_________________
http://www.waspmedia.co.uk |
|
|
|
Jan K. van Dalen
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 5:24 PM |
|
Data ... not sure what you mean but if you can enlight me ... great.
Part of the problem is how to make a dynamic generate page searchable by the
engines, also, for a web page/site to be SEO friendly, it requires several
elements that CCS does not handle well. Can you give me some tips on how
you have achive this with CCS?
Thank you.
"datadoit" <datadoit@forum.codecharge> wrote in message
news:g3ri3v$2jt$1@news.codecharge.com...
> CodeCharge is a tool to -make- web-enabled applications. -Make- your
> web-enabled applications SEO friendly.
>
> You're implying that your hammer needs to know the local building codes
> before sinking the nail in the wrong place.
>
|
|
|
|
Jan K. van Dalen
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 5:28 PM |
|
Waspman ... you are right ... I love CCS ... and I use it for many project.
Is just those projects that are depending on Search Engines to be succeful
that I can have CCS deliver for me. It must be me but ...OTOH ... I have
not seen any help regarding this subject.
"Waspman" <Waspman@forum.codecharge> wrote in message
news:248616e32653ea@news.codecharge.com...
> CCS is a bit more than a hammer DD
>
> This tool does much of the work for us, that's why we like it.
>
> "-Make- your web-enabled applications SEO friendly." That's exactly what
> we
> want to do.
>
> All Jan asked for was little guidance. Don't be so aggressive
>
> Were all love CCS here!
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------
> Sent from YesSoftware forum
> http://forums.yessoftware.com/
>
|
|
|
|
datadoit
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 6:54 PM |
|
Sure. The point I'm making is that CCS is no more responsible or
capable of making your site SEO friendly than any other IDE on the market.
Making your dynamic site traversable by the search engines can be
accomplished with proper web server configuration (Ex: Apache's
mod_rewrite module). Ton's of documentation out there on making search
friendly URL's. Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with CCS as
the tool used to develop the site.
What are the SEO elements you refer to that CCS doesn't handle well?
|
|
|
|
datadoit
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 7:16 PM |
|
Okay, how about an air nailer? :)
The point being made is that CCS is a tool that is in your toolset -
even a multi-function tool at that. But the end result is completely
dependent upon the designer's and developer's skills and talents in the
chosen languages and platforms.
Here's some guidance on SEO:
http://www.amazon.com/Search-Engine-Optimization-Dummie...r/dp/0764567586
|
|
|
|
Waspman
Posts: 948
|
| Posted: 07/03/2008, 5:56 AM |
|
Problem solved (I hope!)
I've just downloaded a little tool aclled Table2CSS and coverted the tables in my templates.
Seems to work OK...
Thank God, I'm trying to make my cms SEO and I've been looking at Symphony, Modx and Silverstripe CMS systems and thinking how complicated they are for the return you get.
Next thing "friendly url's" although not sure this is worth the effort according to what Google say...
Tony
_________________
http://www.waspmedia.co.uk |
|
|
|
songohan
Posts: 89
|
| Posted: 08/24/2008, 9:31 AM |
|
Quote Waspman:
After many years of using CCS for applications and websites I’m about to jump ship…
Why? – Table-less layouts!
I have struggled for a long time with CCS and CSS, but this seems to be the final straw.
I appreciate that tables are right in certain places and I would continue to use CCS for apps and things like stock lists etc. But a large amount of my work (websites) will have to be done in some other tool.
Is there any hope?
Yes, there is hope!
a) if you understand HTML/CSS, go to HTML tab and strip all tables, rebuld complete HTML using DIVs and CSS
b) find someone (like me :) to do it for you.
I'm professional HTML coder and in my company my job is to convert graphic layout to table less accessible code. I'm not much of a programer. CCS is tool to create application, store and retrieve data from database, and it does a great job. HTML is than done by hand. CCS is not tool to create table less HTML code, you can use other tools to do so (eg. Dreamveawer).
Andrej
|
|
|
|
Waspman
Posts: 948
|
| Posted: 08/24/2008, 1:07 PM |
|
To late man...
I found YAML and now it's a whole new ball game
Create templates in YAML use them as containers in CCS (a bit of html removing) and we're off again... CCS all the way man!!!!
_________________
http://www.waspmedia.co.uk |
|
|
|
