在HTML中,表格不应该用于布局,这似乎是普遍的观点。

Why?

我从来没有(老实说,很少)看到过支持这一点的有力论据。通常的答案是:

It's good to separate content from layoutBut this is a fallacious argument; Cliche Thinking. I guess it's true that using the table element for layout has little to do with tabular data. So what? Does my boss care? Do my users care?Perhaps me or my fellow developers who have to maintain a web page care... Is a table less maintainable? I think using a table is easier than using divs and CSS.By the way... why is using a div or a span good separation of content from layout and a table not? Getting a good layout with only divs often requires a lot of nested divs. Readability of the codeI think it's the other way around. Most people understand HTML, few understand CSS. It's better for SEO not to use tablesWhy? Can anybody show some evidence that it is? Or a statement from Google that tables are discouraged from an SEO perspective? Tables are slower.An extra tbody element has to be inserted. This is peanuts for modern web browsers. Show me some benchmarks where the use of a table significantly slows down a page. A layout overhaul is easier without tables, see css Zen Garden.Most web sites that need an upgrade need new content (HTML) as well. Scenarios where a new version of a web site only needs a new CSS file are not very likely. Zen Garden is a nice web site, but a bit theoretical. Not to mention its misuse of CSS.

我对使用divs + CSS而不是表的良好参数非常感兴趣。


当前回答

Flex有一个标签,用于在垂直列中布局内容。说实话,我不认为他们在布局/内容方面做得很好,但至少他们已经解决了这个问题。

像许多对CSS感到沮丧的人一样,我也到处寻找一个简单的答案,当我以为我找到了它时,我感到兴奋,然后当我在Chrome中打开页面时,我的希望破灭了。我肯定没有足够的技能说这是不可能的,但我还没有看到任何人提供样本代码供同行评审,明确地证明它可以可靠地完成。

那么,这个岛的CSS方面有人能推荐一种布局垂直列的心态/方法吗?我尝试过在第二行和第三行绝对定位,但我最终与到处重叠的东西和浮动有类似的问题,如果页面缩小。

如果这个问题有答案,我会欣喜若狂地做正确的事情——只要告诉我一些像“嘿,你试过**流:垂直|水平”这样的事情,我就完全不烦你了。

其他回答

在维护内容的同时进行网站维护和设计检修(这一直都在发生,尤其是在电子商务中):

内容和设计通过表格混合在一起=更新内容和设计。

内容与设计分离=更新设计和少量内容。

如果我有自己的方式,我会将内容保存在PHP中,生成XML,转换为XSLT中的标记,并使用CSS和Javascript进行交互设计。对于Java方面的东西,JSP到JSTL来生成标记。

This isn't really about whether 'divs are better than tables for layout'. Someone who understands CSS can duplicate any design using 'layout tables' pretty straightforwardly. The real win is using HTML elements for what they are there for. The reason you would not use tables for non-tablular data is the same reason you don't store integers as character strings - technology works much more easily when you use it for the purpose for which it is desgined. If it was ever necessary to use tables for layout (because of browser shortcomings in the early 1990s) it certainly isn't now.

WYSIWYG!!! I can't for the life of me get our designers to stop using nested DIVS and styled by elementID css in templates that are supposed to be used by clients in CMS projects. That's the whole point of a WYSIWYG online editor. You are controlling both the content and the layout at the same time! There is no separation at all in the first place in this scenario. Positioned and styled Divs in some external stylesheet are anathema to the whole idea of WYSIWYG editing. Tables can be seen, rows inserted, cells combined and so on. Good luck trying this with divs in a way that doesn't frustrate users.

超级简单的回答:用表格设计可维护的网站是很困难的,而用标准的方法来做是很简单的。

网站不是一个表格,它是相互交互的组件的集合。把它描述成一个表是没有意义的。

下面是来自最近项目的一段html:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
    <title>{DYNAMIC(TITLE)}</title>
    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="./styles/base.css" />
</head>
<body>
    <div id="header">
        <h1><!-- Page title --></h1>
        <ol id="navigation">
            <!-- Navigation items -->
        </ol>
        <div class="clearfix"></div>
    </div>
    <div id="sidebar">
        <!-- Sidebar content -->
    </div>
    <!-- Page content -->
    <p id="footer"><!-- Footer content --></p>
</body>
</html>

这是与基于表格的布局相同的代码。

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
    <title>{DYNAMIC(TITLE)}</title>
    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="./styles/base.css" />
</head>
<body>
    <table cellspacing="0">
        <tr>
            <td><!-- Page Title --></td>
            <td>
                <table>
                    <tr>
                        <td>Navitem</td>
                        <td>Navitem</td>
                    </tr>
                </table>
            </td>
        </tr>
    </table>

    <table>
        <tr>
            <td><!-- Page content --></td>
            <td><!-- Sidebar content --></td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
            <td colspan="2">Footer</td>
        </tr>
    </table>
</body>
</html>

我在基于表格的布局中看到的唯一干净的地方是我对缩进的过度热情。我确信内容部分将有另外两个嵌入式表。

另一件需要考虑的事情是:文件大小。我发现基于表格的布局通常是CSS布局的两倍大。在我们的高速宽带上,这不是一个大问题,但在那些拨号调制解调器上。