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。
有必要弄清楚CSS和div，以便在页面布局中，中央内容列在侧栏之前加载和呈现。但是，如果你正在努力使用浮动div来垂直对齐一个logo和一些赞助文本，那就使用这个表格，继续生活吧。禅宗花园宗教并没有带来多少价值。
将内容与表示分开的思想是对应用程序进行分区，以便不同类型的工作影响不同的代码块。这实际上是关于变更管理的。但是编码标准只能以表面的方式检查代码的当前状态。
应用程序的更改日志依赖于编码标准来“将内容与表示分开”，它将显示跨垂直竖井的并行更改模式。如果对“内容”的更改总是伴随着对“表示”的更改，那么分区的成功程度如何?
如果您真的想高效地划分代码，请使用Subversion并检查更改日志。然后使用最简单的编码技术——divs、表、JavaScript、include、函数、对象、延续等等——来构建应用程序，以便以简单和舒适的方式进行更改。
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。
一张桌子来布置也不错。但大多数情况下，仅靠一张表是无法得到所需的布局的。很快你就有了2到3个嵌套表。这变得非常麻烦。
It IS a LOT harder to read. That's not up to opinion. There's just more nested tags with no identifying marks on them.
Separating content from presentation is a good thing because it allows you to focus on what you're doing. Mixing the two leads to bloated pages that are hard to read.
CSS for styles allows your browser to cache the files and subsequent requests are much faster. This is HUGE.
Tables lock you into a design. Sure, not everyone needs the flexibility of CSS Zen Garden, but I've never worked on a site where I didn't need to change the design a little bit here and there. It's much easier with CSS.
Tables are hard to style. You don't have very much flexibility with them (i.e. you still need to add HTML attributes to fully control a table's styles)
我大概有4年没有用表格来处理非表格数据了。我没有回头。
我真的很想建议你阅读Andy Budd的《CSS Mastery》。棒极了。
图片在ecx.images-amazon.com http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41TH5NFKPEL._SL500_BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45，-64_OU01_AA240_SH20_.jpg
