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.

In the past, screen readers and other accessibility software had a difficult time handling tables in an efficient fashion. To some extent, this became handled in screen readers by the reader switching between a "table" mode and a "layout" mode based on what it saw inside the table. This was often wrong, and so the users had to manually switch the mode when navigating through tables. In any case, the large, often highly nested tables were, and to a large extent, are still very difficult to navigate through using a screen reader.

The same is true when divs or other block-level elements are used to recreate tables and are highly nested. The purpose of divs is to be used as a fomating and layout element, and as such, are intended used to hold similar information, and lay it out on the screen for visual users. When a screen reader encounters a page, it often ignores any layout information, both CSS based, as well as html attribute based(This isn't true for all screen readers, but for the most popular ones, like JAWS, Windows Eyes, and Orca for Linux it is).

为此，表格式数据，也就是逻辑上有意义的在二维或多维维度中排序的数据，具有某种标题，最好放在表中，并使用div来管理页面上内容的布局。(另一种思考“表格数据”的方式是尝试以图表形式绘制它……如果你不能，它可能不是最好的表示在一个表中)

Finally, with a table-based layout, in order to achieve a fine-grained control of the position of elements on the page, highly nested tables are often used. This has two effects: 1.) Increased code size for each page - Since navigation and common structure is often done with the tables, the same code is sent over the network for each request, whereas a div/css based layout pulls the css file over once, and then uses less wordy divs. 2.) Highly nested tables take much longer for the client's browser to render, leading to slightly slower load times.

在这两种情况下，“最后一英里”带宽的增加，以及更快的个人电脑缓解了这些因素，但它们仍然是许多网站存在的问题。

With all of this in mind, as others have said, tables are easier, because they are more grid-oriented, allowing for less thought. If the site in question is not expected to be around long, or will not be maintained, it might make sense to do what is easiest, because it might be the most cost effective. However, if the anticipated userbase might include a substantial portion of handicapped individuals, or if the site will be maintained by others for a long time, spending the time up front to do things in a concise, accessible way may payoff more in the end.

div和CSS的定位允许一个更灵活的设计，导致更容易修改和模板的网页。

也就是说，如果你对灵活性不感兴趣，那么使用一个表而不是一些由CSS变形成表的div绝对是更容易和更快的。我倾向于在设计时使用表格，只是为了更快地让它看起来正确。

看这个重复的问题。

你忘记的一项是可访问性。例如，如果你需要使用屏幕阅读器，基于表格的布局就不能很好地转换。如果您使用政府，则可能需要支持可访问的浏览器，如屏幕阅读器。

我也认为你低估了你在问题中提到的一些事情的影响。例如，如果您既是设计人员又是程序员，您可能没有充分了解它如何将表示和内容分开。但一旦你进入一个商店，他们是两个不同的角色，优势就开始变得清晰起来。

如果你知道你在做什么并且有好的工具，CSS在布局方面确实比表格有显著的优势。虽然每一件物品本身都不能证明放弃餐桌是合理的，但总的来说还是值得的。

我想补充的是，基于div的布局更容易维护、发展和重构。只是在CSS中做了一些改变来重新排序元素，这就完成了。根据我的经验，重新设计使用表的布局是一场噩梦(如果有嵌套的表，则会更糟)。

从语义的角度来看，代码也有意义。

对于为了简单或临时的东西而拼凑在一起的HTML，表很有用。如果你正在构建一个大型网站，你应该使用div和CSS，因为随着时间的推移，随着网站的变化，它将更容易维护。