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。
我很抱歉我的英语不好，但还有一个原因:
我在一些政府机构工作，不使用TABLE的首要原因是残疾人。他们使用机器“翻译”网页。
问题是这个“翻译机器”不能阅读网站，如果它是由TABLE。为什么?因为TABLE是用于数据的。
事实上，如果你使用TABLES，你必须为每个cell指定一些信息，让残疾人知道他们在TABLE中的位置。想象一下，你有一个大表格，必须放大才能看到屏幕上的一个单元格:你必须知道你在哪一行/col。
因此，使用DIV，并且禁用可以简单地阅读文本，并且不会得到一些关于行/cols的奇怪信息，当它们不需要在那里时。
我也更喜欢TABLE来制作快速简单的模板，但我现在习惯了CSS…它很强大，但你真的必须知道你在做什么……：）
CSS/DIV - it's just jobs for the design boys, isn't it. The hundreds of hours I've spent debugging DIV/CSS issues, searching the Internet to get some part of markup working with an obscure browser - it drives me mad. You make one little change and the whole layout goes horrendously wrong - where on eath is the logic in that. Spending hours moving something 3 pixels this way then something else 2 pixels the other to get them all to line up. This just seems plain wrong to me somehow. Just because you're a purist and something is "not the right thing to do" doesn't mean you should make use of it to the nth degree and under all circumstances, especially if it makes your life 1000 times easier.
So I've finally decided, purely on commercial grounds, although I keep use to minimum, if I anticipate 20 hours work to get a DIV placed correctly, I'll stick in a table. It's wrong, it upsets the purists, but in most cases it costs less time and is cheaper to manage. I can then concentrate on getting the application working as the customer wants, rather than pleasing the purists. They do pay the bills after all and my argument to a manager enforcing the use of CSS/DIV - I would merely point out the customers pay his salary as well!
所有这些CSS/DIV争论出现的唯一原因是因为CSS的缺点，首先是因为浏览器之间不兼容，如果它们相互兼容，世界上一半的网页设计师将失业。
When you design a windows form you don't try moving controls around after you have laid them out so I kind of think it's strange to me why you would you want to do this with a web form. I simply can't understand this logic. Get the layout right to start with and what's the problem. I think it's because designers like to flirt with creativity, whilst application developers are more concerned with actually getting the application working, creating business objects, implementing business rules, working out how bits of customer data relates to each other, ensuring the thing meets the customers requirements - you know - like the real world stuff.
不要误解我的意思，这两种观点都是正确的，但是请不要因为开发人员选择了一种更简单、更合乎逻辑的方式来设计表单而批评他们。我们常常有比正确使用表而不是div的语义更重要的事情要担心。
在这个讨论的基础上，我将一些现有的tds和trs转换为div。花了45分钟把它弄得乱七八糟想把所有东西都排列整齐然后我就放弃了。td在10秒后回来-工作-立即-在所有浏览器上，没有更多的事情要做。请试着让我明白——你有什么理由让我用其他方式做这件事!
当我使用CSS设计我的布局时，我通常给每个主要部分都有自己的根(主体级别)div，并使用相对/绝对定位将其置于适当的位置。这比表更灵活一些，因为我不局限于可以用行和列表示的排列。
此外，如果我决定我想要重新安排布局(说我想要导航栏现在在右边)，我可以简单地去改变一个地方(CSS文件)的元素位置，HTML不需要改变。如果我对表执行此操作，我将不得不进入并找到信息，并进行大量属性修改和复制粘贴以获得相同的效果。
事实上，使用CSS，我甚至可以让我的用户选择他们想要的布局如何工作。只要内容区域的一般大小不改变，我完全可以使用一些PHP脚本来根据用户的偏好输出CSS，并允许他们根据自己的喜好重新排列站点。同样，对于表也是可以的，但是维护起来要困难得多。
最后，CSS提供了一个表永远无法提供的主要好处:基于显示设备重新格式化内容的能力。CSS允许我在打印机上使用与显示器上完全不同的样式集(包括位置、格式等)。这也可以扩展到其他媒体，一个很好的例子是Opera Show，它允许一个设计巧妙(非常标准)的CSS增强页面被视为幻灯片显示。
因此，最终，灵活性和管理才是真正的赢家。一般来说，CSS允许你对布局做更多的事情。基于表的布局在技术上没有什么不标准的，但为什么要限制自己呢?
Layout should be easy. The fact that there are articles written on how to achieve a dynamic three column layout with header and footer in CSS shows that it is a poor layout system. Of course you can get it to work, but there are literally hundreds of articles online about how to do it. There are pretty much no such articles for a similar layout with tables because it's patently obvious. No matter what you say against tables and in favor of CSS, this one fact undoes it all: a basic three column layout in CSS is often called "The Holy Grail".
如果这不能让你说“WTF”，那么你现在真的需要放下酷爱饮料了。
我喜欢CSS。它提供了惊人的样式选项和一些很酷的定位工具，但作为一个布局引擎，它是有缺陷的。需要某种类型的动态网格定位系统。一个直接的方法来对齐多个轴上的盒子，而不知道他们的大小。我不在乎你叫它<table>或<gridlayout>或其他什么，但这是CSS中缺少的一个基本布局特性。
更大的问题是，由于不承认有缺失的特性，CSS狂热者一直在阻碍CSS的发展。如果CSS能像世界上其他布局引擎一样提供像样的多轴网格定位，我很乐意停止使用表格。(你应该意识到这个问题已经被除了W3C之外的所有人用多种语言解决过很多次了，对吧?没有人否认这样一个功能是有用的。)
叹息。足够的通风。去吧，把头埋进沙子里。
