Is your site in CSS or table format?

@tryme1 192115 wrote:

I love tableless css that really differentiates the content and the layout. It’s just so much easier.

I don’t know if it’s easier (if you are just learning CSS), but it sure does give you total control and you can be as creative as you like.

How do you handle your content? Do use Dreamweaver?

6000 pages of nested tables – and converting them all. Same age site and a dinosaur.

Google doesn’t like nested tables.

I dont really believe tables are a downfall to google.. CSS is handy and of course there are die hards that want everything to be complete CSS and of course eveything has its place but there is no evidence google likes or dislikes tables.

I use Dreamweaver CS3 and have two sites that utilise both tables and css. I would not know how to use CSS only.

you can not beat a table for showing table data, period!

its the question of using tables for format not data display.

@GamTrak 192065 wrote:

I’ve recently started converting my site which I created in 2001 with Front Page to Dreamweaver.

It was quite a learning curve, but I’ve managed to learn how to do it and I’m in awe of the control you have with CSS.

When was your site created and do you plan on changing a table based site to CSS and what are the benefits?

Large images aside, nested tables are the worst for loading time as the browser has to make a bunch of additional calculations when rendering the page.

Table designs overcome many of screen and resolution problems encountered with a pure css design, especially the dreaded 3 column layout.

Also there are a number of cross browser compatibility problems with css layouts. For example both FF and IE treat margins and padding differently, however there are several hacks and workarounds. I believe FF renders css correctly but most visitors use IE. It is best to make sure it renders the way you want in as many browers and screen sizes/resolutions as possible.

We are now sticking with one or two tables per page.

Everything loads tons faster this way. And, whether google likes nested tables or not, it does like things to load fast.

I’ve got some old sites with bunches of tables but – from a coding point of view – I love tableless css that really differentiates the content and the layout. It’s just so much easier.

@slotplayer 192102 wrote:

Large images aside, nested tables are the worst for loading time as the browser has to make a bunch of additional calculations when rendering the page.

Thanks for that bit of info. My goal is to only use a table to display data from mySQL (once I figure that part out) and use CSS for everything else.

I use FF and IE to test and then compensate for the differences. As along as it pass the Browser Compatabilty test then I move on to the next thing. hehe

What affect does spry components have on speed and how many images or what should the final size of the each page be or NOT exceed?

I use notepad or the text editor in cuteftp.. need to step it up one day lol.