|
Good that settles it.
Bud & Lou would be proud
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta I told my psychiatrist that I was hearing voices in my head. He said you don't have a psychiatrist!
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: With apologies to Abbott & Costello.
Why.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
No, I'm What. Why's over there.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I don't know!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure Doctor Bell[^] could introduce you. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Slowly, he should have turned.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Third base!
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Who's on first.
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. Not the pronoun, but a player with the unlikely name of "Who", is on first. 
The Simpsons - Who's On First? - YouTube[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you're not familiar with the original[^], to which the Simpson's blorb refers.
I'm retired. There's a nap for that...
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
Yet that's their whole purpose.
I suspect your pants are so tight that not enough oxygen is getting to your brain.
modified 2-Dec-16 22:19pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Once everyone stops using IE6 (or any version of IE, for that matter), and upgrades their ancient versions of Firefox[^], maybe a proper CSS layout would make sense.
Until then, it's probably too much arse-ache for too little benefit.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
There are only 0.03% internet users that use IE6 (soure: "Can I use" usage table[^]). So I think if Code Project update there CSS whitout table tags if not needed, this percentage will be lower than 0.001%.
|
|
|
|
|
It's still going to break the site for some users, and require a lot more work to keep the site working for most of us.
What benefit do you think you'd get out of a CSS layout redesign? Are you using a screen reader which is struggling with the table-based layout?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Hein Pauwelyn wrote: There are only 0.03% internet users that use IE6
That's awesome news!
So, when are you going to donate your time to convert CodeProject's entire site over to use a proper CSS layout? All free of charge of course, because you're a great guy!
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: proper CSS
That's an oxymoron!
|
|
|
|
|
What's an "oxy"? And don't call me a moron!
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
As you can see, tables can be used for layout.
SCNR
|
|
|
|
|
Hein Pauwelyn wrote: cannot be used
It can be used - as you've seen. Though tables are meant for displaying tabular data such as a grid, but that doesn't mean you cannot use it for layouting. Most folks uses tables for layout because their CSS skills aren't good or to support ancient browsers.
|
|
|
|
|
unlike css, tables-for-layouts works in html email (and inasmuch common practice).
- same source translates well to almost any browser, old or new.
- so why use something that only works some of the time when there is another way works all of the time?
anyway, in too many case css is like racing stripes on a car, while kiddies think it looks cool, in some places it's just wrong, and they don't make the car go any faster either.
Sin tack ear lol
Pressing the "Any" key may be continuate
modified 2-Dec-16 9:37am.
|
|
|
|
|
Tables were used for layout for 15 years before CSS came. Just because something is new, doesn't always mean that it is better. There's no reason to wrinkle ones nose at "old" technologies just because something "new" is available.
I still consider tables superior to CSS as far as layout is concerned. It's not because I don't know CSS, just because I don't like it!
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, tables are! Unless you're only targeting mobile devices. In my organization, there are still people using IE 8 and many of the applications I developed were for IE 6 because a couple of years ago, people were still using it. I won't rewrite for the sake of it and some of my tabled applications still look good on phones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hein Pauwelyn wrote: Some designers knows that tables cannot be used for layout.
And the rest of them don't subscribe to idealism and get the work done using whatever works best.
|
|
|
|
|
Hein Pauwelyn wrote: Some designers knows that tables cannot be used for layout.
But those out in the real world (as opposed to an academic Ivory Tower) know they can. And are. Because they work.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
