因为维护一个使用表格的网站是非常困难的，并且需要更长的编码时间。如果你害怕漂浮的潜水器，那就去上一门潜水课吧。它们并不难理解，而且它们的效率大约是前者的100倍，麻烦也少了100万倍(除非你不理解它们——但是，嘿，欢迎来到计算机的世界)。

任何考虑用表格做布局的人最好不要指望我来维护它。这是渲染网站最落后的方式。感谢上帝，我们现在有了更好的选择。我永远不会回去。

有些人可能没有意识到使用现代工具创建一个网站所带来的时间和精力的好处，这很可怕。

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.

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!

看起来你只是习惯了桌子，仅此而已。 将布局放在表格中会限制你的布局。用CSS你可以移动位，看看http://csszengarden.com/ 不，布局通常不需要很多嵌套的div。

没有表格的布局和适当的语义HTML更干净，因此更容易阅读。 为什么不理解CSS的人要尝试阅读它呢?如果有人认为自己是web开发人员，那么对CSS的良好掌握是必须的。

SEO的好处来自于将最重要的内容放在页面上方的能力 拥有更好的内容与标记比率。

http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/

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。

508符合性-屏幕阅读器能够理解你的标记。 等待呈现——直到</table>元素结束，表格才会在浏览器中呈现。