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

I have found that even with the best planning divs come up short in several respects. For instance. there is no way with divs to have a bottom bar that always sits at the bottom of the browser, even when the rest of the content does not go to the bottom of the browser. Also, you cannot elegantly do anything better than three columns, and you cannot have columns that grow and shrink according the the width of their content. In the end, we try to use divs first. However, we will not limit our html designs based on some religious content vs layout ideal.

其他回答

无论如何,这并不是一个明确的论点,但是对于CSS,你可以使用相同的标记并根据介质改变布局,这是一个很好的优势。例如,对于打印页面,您可以安静地抑制导航,而不必创建打印机友好的页面。

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。

根据508法规(对于视障屏幕阅读器),表格应该只用于保存数据,而不是用于布局,因为它会导致屏幕阅读器崩溃。至少别人是这么告诉我的。

如果您为每个div分配名称,您也可以使用CSS将它们一起蒙皮。只是让他们坐成你想要的样子有点麻烦。

不幸的是,CSS Zen Garden不能再作为一个好的HTML/CSS设计的例子。实际上,他们最近的所有设计都使用图形作为部分标题。这些图形文件是在CSS中指定的。

因此,一个网站的目的是展示将设计排除在内容之外的优势,现在却经常犯将内容纳入设计的不可言说的罪。(如果HTML文件中的节标题要更改,则显示的节标题不会更改)。

这只能说明,即使是那些提倡严格的DIV和CSS宗教的人,也不能遵循他们自己的规则。你可以用它来指导你如何严格遵守它们。

CSS布局通常在可访问性方面要好得多,前提是内容以自然的顺序出现,并且没有样式表也有意义。不仅仅是屏幕阅读器难以适应基于表格的布局:它们也使移动浏览器更难正确呈现页面。

此外,使用基于div的布局,你可以很容易地用打印样式表做一些很酷的事情,比如从打印页面中排除页眉、页脚和导航——我认为这是不可能的,或者至少很难用基于表格的布局做到这一点。

If you're doubting that separation of content from layout is easier with divs than with tables, take a look at the div-based HTML at CSS Zen Garden, see how changing the stylesheets can drastically change the layout, and think about whether you could achieve the same variety of layouts if the HTML was table based... If you're doing a table-based layout, you're unlikely to be using CSS to control all the spacing and padding in the cells (if you were, you'd almost certainly find it easier to use floating divs etc. in the first place). Without using CSS to control all that, and because of the fact that tables specify the left-to-right and top-to bottom order of things in the HTML, tables tend to mean that your layout becomes very much fixed in the HTML.

实际上,我认为完全改变一个基于div和css的设计而不改变div是非常困难的。然而,使用基于div和css的布局,就更容易调整不同块之间的间距以及它们的相对大小。