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

这并不一定是一场战争。和谐是可能的。

使用一个表的整体布局和div在其中。

<table> 
    <tr><td colspan="3"><div>Top content</div></td></tr>
    <tr> 
        <td><div>Left navigation</div></td> 
        <td><div>Main content</div></td> 
        <td><div>Right navigation</div></td> 
    </tr>
    <tr><td colspan="3"><div>Bottom content</div></td></tr>
</table>

看,没有嵌套表。

我读过很多关于如何用divs实现这一点的文章,但从来没有发现任何事情,每次都没有问题。

一旦你有了整体结构,Divs是很棒的,但坦率地说,流体页眉/页脚和三个流体列是Divs的一大痛苦。Divs不是为流动性而设计的,所以为什么要使用它们呢?

注意,这种方法将在链接文本中提供100%的CSS遵从性

其他回答

一个例子:你想要居中 一个页面的主要内容区域,但在 为了把浮体装在里面, 它需要浮动。没有 CSS中的float: center。

这并不是在居中元素中“包含浮点数”的唯一方法。所以,这根本不是一个好的论点!

在某种程度上,“divs vs table”是一个错误的前提。

把一页快速地分成三列?说实话,表格更简单。但是没有专业人士将它们用于布局,因为它们将页面元素的位置锁定在页面中。

真正的争论是“由CSS完成的定位(最好是在远程文件中)”,而不是“在页面中由HTML完成的定位”。相对于后者,每个人都能看到前者的好处吗?

Size -- if your page layout is in the HTML, in the pages, it can't be cached, and it has to be repeated on every page. You will save enormous amounts of bandwidth if your layout is in a cached CSS file, not in the page. Multiple developers can work on the same page at the same time -- I work on the HTML, other guy works on the CSS. No repository needed, no problems with over-writing, file locking etc. Making changes is easier -- there will be problems with layout in different browsers, but you only have to fix one file, the CSS file, to sort them out. Accessibility, as mentioned a lot previously. Tables assume a two-dimensional layout works for everyone. That's not how some users view your content and it's not how Google views your content.

考虑一下:

[ picture ] [ picture ] [ picture ]
[ caption ] [ caption ] [ caption ]

表示包含6个单元格的表中的两行。能看到二维表格布局的人会在每张图片下看到标题。但是使用语音合成,或者PDA,以及搜索引擎蜘蛛,那是

picture picture picture caption caption caption

有了表格,这种关系就明显消失了。

div和CSS是否更适合在HTML页面上简单地布局矩形以在最短的时间内实现给定的设计?不,他们可能不是。但我不是在快速布局矩形来实现给定的设计。我想的是更大的前景。

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。

I still don't quite understand how divs / CSS make it easier to change a page design when you consider the amount of testing to ensure the changes work on all browsers, especially with all the hacks and so on. Its a hugely frustrating and tedious process which wastes large amounts of time and money. Thankfully the 508 legislation only applies to the USA (land of the free - yeah right) and so being as I am based in the UK, I can develop web sites in whatever style I choose. Contrary to popular (US) belief, legislation made in Washington doesn't apply to the rest of the world - thank goodness for that. It must have been a good day in the world of web design the day the legislation came into force. I think I'm becoming increasingly cynical as I get older with 25 years in the IT industry but I feel sure this kind of legislation is just to protect jobs. In reality anyone can knock together a reasonable web page with a couple of tables. It takes a lot more effort and knowledge to do this with DIVs / CSS. In my experience it can take hours and hours Googling to find solutions to quite simple problems and reading incomprehensible articles in forums full of idealistic zealots all argueing about the 'right' way to do things. You can't just dip your toe in the water and get things to work properly in every case. It also seems to me that the lack of a definitive guide to using DIVS / CSS "out of the box", that applies to all situations, working on browsers, and written using 'normal' language with no geek speak, also smells of a bit of protectionism. I'm an application developer and I would say it takes almost twice as long to figure out layout problems and test against all browsers than it does to create the basic application, design and implement business objects, and create the database back end. My time = money, both for me and my customers alike so I am sorry if I don't reject all the pro DIV / CSS arguments in favour of cutting costs and providing value for money for my customers. Maybe its just the way that developers minds work, but it seems to me far easier to change a complex table structure than it is to modify DIVs / CSS. Thankfully it now appears that a solution to these issues is now available - its called WPF.

我将一个接一个地看你的论点,并试着指出其中的错误。

将内容与布局分开是很好的 但这是一个错误的论点;陈词滥调的思考。

It's not fallacious at all because HTML was designed intentionally. Misuse of an element might not be completely out of question (after all, new idioms have developed in other languages, as well) but possible negative implications have to be counterbalanced. Additionally, even if there were no arguments against misusing the <table> element today, there might be tomorrow because of the way browser vendors apply special treatment to the element. After all, they know that “<table> elements are for tabular data only” and might use this fact to improve the rendering engine, in the process subtly changing how <table>s behave, and thus breaking cases where it was previously misused.

那又怎样?我的老板在乎吗?我的用户关心吗?

视情况而定。你的老板是尖头发吗?那他可能不在乎。如果她有能力,那么她就会在乎,因为用户会在乎。

也许我或我的开发伙伴谁必须维护一个网页关心…表是否更难维护?我认为使用表格比使用div和css更容易。

大多数专业的web开发人员似乎反对你[需要引用]。事实上,表的可维护性较差,这是显而易见的。使用表格进行布局意味着更改公司布局实际上意味着更改每个页面。这可能会非常昂贵。另一方面,明智地将语义上有意义的HTML与CSS结合使用可能会将此类更改限制在CSS和所使用的图片上。

顺便说一下……为什么使用div或span可以很好地将内容与布局分开,而不是表格?只有div的良好布局通常需要大量嵌套的div。

深度嵌套<div>是反模式,就像表布局一样。优秀的网页设计师不需要太多这样的东西。另一方面,即使是这样深嵌套的div也没有很多表布局的问题。事实上,它们甚至可以通过逻辑地将内容划分为多个部分来构成语义结构。

代码的可读性 我觉得正好相反。大多数人懂html,很少人懂css。这是简单的。

“大多数人”不重要。专业人士。对于专业人士来说,表格布局比HTML + CSS带来更多的问题。这就像是说我不应该使用GVim或Emacs,因为记事本对大多数人来说更简单。或者我不应该使用LaTeX,因为MS Word对大多数人来说更简单。

SEO最好不要使用表格

我不知道这是不是真的,也不会把它作为一个论点,但它是合乎逻辑的。搜索引擎搜索相关数据。虽然表格数据当然可能是相关的,但它很少是用户搜索的内容。用户搜索页面标题或类似突出位置中使用的术语。因此,将表格内容排除在过滤之外,从而大幅减少处理时间(和成本!)是合乎逻辑的。

表比较慢。 必须插入一个额外的tbody元素。这对于现代网络浏览器来说是微不足道的。

额外的元素与表变慢无关。另一方面,表的布局算法要困难得多,浏览器通常必须等待整个表加载后才能开始布局内容。此外,缓存布局将不起作用(CSS可以很容易地缓存)。所有这些都在前面提到过。

向我展示一些使用表会显著降低页面速度的基准测试。

不幸的是,我没有任何基准测试数据。我自己也会感兴趣,因为这个论点确实缺乏一定的科学严谨性。

大多数需要升级的网站也需要新的内容(html)。一个新版本的网站只需要一个新的css文件的场景是不太可能的。

Not at all. I've worked on several cases where changing the design was simplified by a separation of content and design. It's often still necessary to change some HTML code but the changes will always be much more confined. Additionally, design changes must on occasion be made dynamically. Consider template engines such as the one used by the WordPress blogging system. Table layouts would literally kill this system. I've worked on a similar case for a commercial software. Being able to change the design without changing the HTML code was one of the business requirements.

Another thing. Table layout makes automated parsing of websites (screen scraping) much harder. This might sound trivial because, after all, who does it? I was surprised myself. Screen scraping can help a lot if the service in question doesn't offer a WebService alternative to access its data. I'm working in bioinformatics where this is a sad reality. Modern web techniques and WebServices have not reached most developers and often, screen scraping is the only way to automate the process of getting data. No wonder that many biologists still perform such tasks manually. For thousands of data sets.

我不得不用这两种方式来做网站,再加上第三种,可怕的“混合”布局,包括表格、div和样式:div /CSS轻松胜出。

为了匹配一个表格单元格的代码权重,您必须立即嵌套三个深度的div。这种效果会随着嵌套表的增加而扩大。

我也更喜欢做一个布局变化,而不是一个变化,在我的网站的每一页。

我可以完全控制divs/css的各个方面。表格以一种可怕的方式把它搞得一团糟,尤其是在IE浏览器中,我从来没有选择不支持这个浏览器。

我维护或重新设计一个div /css网站的时间只是表格的一小部分。

最后,我可以用CSS和几乎任何脚本语言创新多种可切换的布局。这对我来说是不可能的。

在你做决定的时候,祝你的投资回报率好运。