He compares freebsd.org to mezzoblue.com in a text based browser, while freebsd.org shows as three cols of text, mezzoblue.com, shows as one.

This means that there is more room in the text browser for content to fit accross the screen, on freebsd.org any long lines of code will be split and placed on the following line. While mezzoblue.com will also have the same thing happen, there is more room for the content.

He also makes the point that the table layout requires less CSS to render the same as the semantic layout. This is a valid point, but he needs to recognise that you’re never going to change the table layout with just CSS, you will have to edit every single page of the website, and edit the CSS.

With the semantic layout, all you really need to edit is the CSS. He also placed some of the styling of the table layout in the HTML.

This guy just doesn’t understand the reasons for content and design seperation.

I was just about to hire a therapist for your upcoming mid-life crisis, but then I realized you were just quoting some other poor bloke.

I like cheese.

have you ever wondered why everyone understands you when you are using the word ‘computer’ to describe a computer?

It’s because you are using semantics. In other words : you are using conventions to make sure everyone understands you. Even more : your parents and peers thaugt you that these conventions are the most efficient way to pass along a message.

Same goes for any language, markup or not. Now, using <p class=”list-item”> is much like using the word ‘prostitute’ to describe a nun. Not only do you cause confusion, you also set a bad example for those trying to learn the language.

That’s what the semantics debate is all about. The css-positioning-versus-tabular-layout debate is a much more specific issue.

This one is mezzoblue.com, the website of one of the most influential CSS designers in the history of the Internet. Some would say it looks “freakin’ awesome”

… why?

Mr Shea is responsible for the creation of the CSS Zen Garden yes, however from my knowledge he’s known for little else. mezzoblue.com showcases nothing new in CSS design and there’s far better designs out there.

You complained about the appearance of Mezzoblue’s ISSN registration in the site header, simply because you didn’t seem to understand what it meant. That’s not Dave’s problem, nor the browser’s, it’s just yours.

You complained about not being able to find the sidebar, which comes at the end of the document as supplementary content (that is, content separate from the main content, of lesser importance). “Sidebar” is a publishing term and doesn’t neccessarily refer to a spacial location. Perhaps Dave could choose a different name for it to avoid just this sort of confusion, but had you actually selected the link you complained about you would have been directed straight to the sidebar. That’s why the link is there.

In web standards parlance, “semantics” has jack-all to do with the visual layout of a page. Semantic markup means taking an element’s inherent meaning into account, sometimes injecting additional meaning through attributes and context, and using the most appropriate element for the content it delineates.

Tables have their own semantic meaning, which is to mark up tabular data. Calendars and train schedules are best organized in a table where the data can be sorted into related columns and rows. Tell me, please, what is the semantic value of a table used purely for visual/presentational arrangement of elements? What column of data is correctly labeled with a transparent spacer gif?

Using table elements to trick text into taking on a visually pleasing layout is an inappropriate abuse of HTML. It’s not the most semantically correct element to use, and the only reason your text browser renders it so well is because web developers have abused HTML for far too long and browser-makers have chosen to accomodate it.

The web is, at its core a textual medium, not a graphical one. Imagery is secondary to content, CSS rules are suggestions at best, and even the most “freakin’ awesome” design should not damage the integrity and availability of the content. More and more of us are coming to understand this every day.

Please get out of 1997 and join us here in the new millennium where we no longer treat our meaningful content like misbehaving pixels to be beaten into a grid.

Comedy gold. At least if he’d used Lynx, a text-only browser more than three people in the world have heard of, his argument would have been somewhat compelling. Of course Lynx (which, more relevantly, renders similar to plenty of mobile browsers) totally reverses his findings, but hey. They got a link out of it right?

Mr. Shea, Mr. Shea… so, your justification for this is, essentially, since you’ve never heard of links or links2, my argument doesn’t count. I said the majority of browsers render tabular layouts better. I said in the FAQ that not all text-based browsers will render the sites the same way. You have to realize that every major operating system/distribution has a package, port, or for links. It’s not unknown to the Internet. Try a real argument next time.

For the rest of you… understand that I don’t actually hate semantic code. I know that it has its usage — if your website is aimed at, for instance, blind users, semantic code might be just what you need (screenreaders don’t describe tabular layouts so well, as one of the comments to my article demonstrates).

I find it funny that essentially the worst argument against what I said is that I’m complaining about default indentation of headers. Yes, I am, but if you work your way around that half of a paragraph, you might see some of the other things I wrote.

<crawls back under rock />

“I feel that it is important to take a new look at using tables to design websites, and perhaps even make recommendations to the W3C to create new tags that will help designers organize and manage websites even more efficiently than tables can.”

Aren’t they already doing this?

I do tableless design wherever possible, but floating divs isn’t the greatest either; let’s be honest. While I do it, it always strikes me as a bit of a hack. I hope the w3c recommends something better.

Not that the author hasn’t thought this out, however the logic and thoughts behind all this are skewed.

And someone please tell me…

“…help organize the code of a page more effectively…”

WTF tables are these ones that he is using?