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

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)

其他回答

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。

我曾经了解到,一个表是立即加载的,换句话说,当连接很慢的时候,表所在的空间保持空白,直到整个表被加载,另一方面,一个div加载从上到下的速度与数据到达的速度一样快,不管它是否已经完成。

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。

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.

当然,这篇文章有点小题大做,争论似乎很简单,很容易反驳。

网页是Web开发人员的领域,如果他们说div和CSS比表格更好,那对我来说已经足够好了。

如果布局是由服务器应用程序生成的表实现的,那么新的布局意味着对应用程序的更改,应用程序的重新构建和重新部署,而不仅仅是对css文件的更改。

另外,可访问性。用于布局的表格会使网站无法访问,所以不要使用它们。这是显而易见的,更不用说违法了。