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

一般来说,表并不比CSS更容易或更易于维护。然而,在一些特定的布局问题中,表确实是最简单和最灵活的解决方案。

在表示标记和CSS支持相同类型的设计的情况下,CSS显然是更可取的,没有人会认为字体标记比在CSS中指定排版更好,因为CSS提供了与字体标记相同的功能,但以一种更干净的方式。

The issue with tables, however, is basically that the table-layout model in CSS is not supported in Microsoft Internet Explorer. Tables and CSS are therefore not equivalent in power. The missing part is the grid-like behavior of tables, where the edges of cells align both vertically and horizontally, while cells still expand to contain their content. This behavior is not easy to achieve in pure CSS without hardcoding some dimensions, which makes the design rigid and brittle (as long as we have to support Internet Explorer - in other browsers this is easliy achieved by using display:table-cell).

因此,这并不是一个表或CSS更可取的问题,而是一个认识到使用表可以使布局更灵活的具体情况的问题。

不使用表的最重要原因是可访问性。Web内容可访问性指南http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/建议不要使用表格进行布局。如果您担心可访问性(在某些情况下,您可能有法律义务这样做),即使表更简单,也应该使用CSS。请注意,您总是可以用CSS创建与表相同的布局,这可能只是需要更多的工作。

其他回答

In the past, screen readers and other accessibility software had a difficult time handling tables in an efficient fashion. To some extent, this became handled in screen readers by the reader switching between a "table" mode and a "layout" mode based on what it saw inside the table. This was often wrong, and so the users had to manually switch the mode when navigating through tables. In any case, the large, often highly nested tables were, and to a large extent, are still very difficult to navigate through using a screen reader.

The same is true when divs or other block-level elements are used to recreate tables and are highly nested. The purpose of divs is to be used as a fomating and layout element, and as such, are intended used to hold similar information, and lay it out on the screen for visual users. When a screen reader encounters a page, it often ignores any layout information, both CSS based, as well as html attribute based(This isn't true for all screen readers, but for the most popular ones, like JAWS, Windows Eyes, and Orca for Linux it is).

为此,表格式数据,也就是逻辑上有意义的在二维或多维维度中排序的数据,具有某种标题,最好放在表中,并使用div来管理页面上内容的布局。(另一种思考“表格数据”的方式是尝试以图表形式绘制它……如果你不能,它可能不是最好的表示在一个表中)

Finally, with a table-based layout, in order to achieve a fine-grained control of the position of elements on the page, highly nested tables are often used. This has two effects: 1.) Increased code size for each page - Since navigation and common structure is often done with the tables, the same code is sent over the network for each request, whereas a div/css based layout pulls the css file over once, and then uses less wordy divs. 2.) Highly nested tables take much longer for the client's browser to render, leading to slightly slower load times.

在这两种情况下,“最后一英里”带宽的增加,以及更快的个人电脑缓解了这些因素,但它们仍然是许多网站存在的问题。

With all of this in mind, as others have said, tables are easier, because they are more grid-oriented, allowing for less thought. If the site in question is not expected to be around long, or will not be maintained, it might make sense to do what is easiest, because it might be the most cost effective. However, if the anticipated userbase might include a substantial portion of handicapped individuals, or if the site will be maintained by others for a long time, spending the time up front to do things in a concise, accessible way may payoff more in the end.

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.

根据过去的经验,我必须选择DIV。即使在OOP中,主要目的也是减少对象之间的耦合,因此这个概念可以应用于DIVS和表。表用于保存数据,而不是围绕页面排列数据。DIV是专门设计用于在页面周围排列项目的,因此设计应该使用DIV,表应该用于存储数据。

此外,编辑由表格组成的网站是非常困难的(在我看来)

对我来说,一个巨大的问题是,表,特别是嵌套表,需要更长的时间来呈现比一个正确布局的css实现。(你可以让css一样慢)。

所有浏览器呈现css的速度都更快,因为每个div都是一个单独的元素,所以用户在阅读时可以加载屏幕。(对于庞大的数据集等)。我在那个实例中使用了css而不是表格,甚至没有处理布局。

嵌套的表(单元格中的表等)直到找到最后一个“/table”才会呈现到浏览器窗口。更糟糕的是,定义不清的表有时甚至无法呈现!或者当它发生的时候,事情就会不正常。(没有正确地与“TD”等共进)

我在大多数情况下使用表格,但当涉及到大数据和希望为最终用户快速呈现屏幕时,我尽最大努力利用CSS所提供的东西。

我相信这是一个与普遍问题有关的问题。HTML诞生时,没有人能预见到它的广泛应用。另一项在自身成功的重压下几乎崩溃的技术。当HTML页面用vi在绿色文本终端上编写时,向页面访问者显示数据所需要的只是一个TABLE,而且大多数数据都是以表格形式显示的。

我们都知道事物是如何进化的。相对来说,table最近已经过时了,但是有很多理由更喜欢基于div和CSS的布局(可访问性不是最后一个)。当然我不能写一个CSS来拯救我的生命:-),我认为图形设计专家应该总是在手边。

也就是说……即使在现代网站中,也有许多数据应该在表格中显示。