Prev: Right and left padding with Opera
Next: One frame and many photos
From: Jeff Thies on 25 Apr 2010 08:28
dorayme wrote:
> In article <hr043b$a78$1(a)news.albasani.net>,
> Jeff Thies <jeff_thies(a)att.net> wrote:
>
>> Tables are powerful things, but they require counting a fixed number
>> of columns, when in fact columns have no meaning here, and neither do rows.
>
> Well, I am not sure what you mean, as far as I can see and tried
> my best to explain, they have perfect meanings. Tables are a way
> to organise lists, they are not something opposed in meaning to
> lists.

A list only has one dimension, length.

A table has two, length and width. Making a list into a table throws
away the "extra" dimension. Now,you have argued before, that a one
column table is effectively a list. I don't argue that. But what meaning
do all those other columns have if you have more than one one column?
They have none, but does it matter? Not really, but using meaningless
containers (divs) is just as valid, and is a *much* more flexible way of
handling that.

Jeff
>
From: dorayme on 25 Apr 2010 18:08
In article <hr1cir$ift$1(a)news.albasani.net>,
Jeff Thies <jeff_thies(a)att.net> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
> > In article <hr043b$a78$1(a)news.albasani.net>,
> > Jeff Thies <jeff_thies(a)att.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Tables are powerful things, but they require counting a fixed number
> >> of columns, when in fact columns have no meaning here, and neither do rows.
> >
> > Well, I am not sure what you mean, as far as I can see and tried
> > my best to explain, they have perfect meanings. Tables are a way
> > to organise lists, they are not something opposed in meaning to
> > lists.
>
> A list only has one dimension, length.
>

So called single lists can have anonymous extra dimensions and I
am happy to argue this if anyone is interested. But it is not
quite relevant to the table material we are discussing here. I am
not here trying to push the seemingly extreme view that a single
list is semantically equivalent to a simple table. We are talking
a number of lists. And a table is an excellent way to organise a
number of related lists.

> A table has two, length and width.

A single column table is a legal entity. It has one
normal/obvious dimension. But the fact remains that a table can
be as one dimensional as a list and a *group of related lists*
can be as two dimensional as a table.


> ... what meaning
> do all those other columns have if you have more than one one column?
> They have none, but does it matter? Not really, but using meaningless
> containers (divs) is just as valid, and is a *much* more flexible way of
> handling that.

It seems to me to be sub-optimal to use a shifter when a
specialised spanner is the right tool for the job. If you try to
be as semantic in the markup as possible, you avoid DIVs as much
as possible. DIVs and SPANs are last resort elements. That they
need to be used even by the best practioners is a testament to
the compromises that have had to be made in the creation of
HTML/CSS, they are nothing to be too proud of or used when there
is clearly something semantically better available.

To answer your question about the "meaning" of these "extra
dimensions": If you have fifty products for sale and you have
fifty lists for each one, each list listing all about the
product, then the best way to do this is to represent these lists
in a table. In my previous:

"Gloria makes things to sell, she displays her wares on the
internet in a table. Each product has a different row. In each
row, all about the product falls under three table headings
horizontally across the page: what it looks like, its name, its
brochure. Each row is a list of values of properties of one
product, each column is very much about a particular property of
the products."

the two dimensions are doing real work:

1. The down dimension is a useful list of all the products for
sale by Gloria along with the bundle of things that goes with
each product (the look, the colour, the price and so on). This is
important, it is is not a list of miscellaneous products scattred
about the universe, it is a list of things for sale by Gloria, or
made by her hand. These things are not *said* in the table. But
they are *shown*, they are represented. That is what a table
does, it represents things, mostly visually so humans can see
what is going on at a glance. What they understand at a glance is
information and the vertical in this case is information and very
neatly accomplished too.

2. The across dimension is a list of all the things about the
individual product on one or other of Gloria's rows.

--
dorayme
From: Jeff Thies on 25 Apr 2010 18:20
dorayme wrote:
> In article <hr1cir$ift$1(a)news.albasani.net>,
> Jeff Thies <jeff_thies(a)att.net> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>>> In article <hr043b$a78$1(a)news.albasani.net>,
>>> Jeff Thies <jeff_thies(a)att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tables are powerful things, but they require counting a fixed number
>>>> of columns, when in fact columns have no meaning here, and neither do rows.
>>> Well, I am not sure what you mean, as far as I can see and tried
>>> my best to explain, they have perfect meanings. Tables are a way
>>> to organise lists, they are not something opposed in meaning to
>>> lists.
>> A list only has one dimension, length.
>>
>
> So called single lists can have anonymous extra dimensions and I
> am happy to argue this if anyone is interested. But it is not
> quite relevant to the table material we are discussing here. I am
> not here trying to push the seemingly extreme view that a single
> list is semantically equivalent to a simple table. We are talking
> a number of lists. And a table is an excellent way to organise a
> number of related lists.
>
>> A table has two, length and width.
>
> A single column table is a legal entity. It has one
> normal/obvious dimension. But the fact remains that a table can
> be as one dimensional as a list and a *group of related lists*
> can be as two dimensional as a table.
>
>
>> ... what meaning
>> do all those other columns have if you have more than one one column?
>> They have none, but does it matter? Not really, but using meaningless
>> containers (divs) is just as valid, and is a *much* more flexible way of
>> handling that.
>
> It seems to me to be sub-optimal to use a shifter when a
> specialised spanner is the right tool for the job. If you try to
> be as semantic in the markup as possible, you avoid DIVs as much
> as possible. DIVs and SPANs are last resort elements. That they
> need to be used even by the best practioners is a testament to
> the compromises that have had to be made in the creation of
> HTML/CSS, they are nothing to be too proud of or used when there
> is clearly something semantically better available.
>
> To answer your question about the "meaning" of these "extra
> dimensions": If you have fifty products for sale and you have
> fifty lists for each one, each list listing all about the
> product, then the best way to do this is to represent these lists
> in a table. In my previous:
>
> "Gloria makes things to sell, she displays her wares on the
> internet in a table. Each product has a different row. In each
> row, all about the product falls under three table headings
> horizontally across the page: what it looks like, its name, its
> brochure. Each row is a list of values of properties of one
> product, each column is very much about a particular property of
> the products."
>
> the two dimensions are doing real work:
>
> 1. The down dimension is a useful list of all the products for
> sale by Gloria along with the bundle of things that goes with
> each product (the look, the colour, the price and so on). This is
> important, it is is not a list of miscellaneous products scattred
> about the universe, it is a list of things for sale by Gloria, or
> made by her hand. These things are not *said* in the table. But
> they are *shown*, they are represented. That is what a table
> does, it represents things, mostly visually so humans can see
> what is going on at a glance. What they understand at a glance is
> information and the vertical in this case is information and very
> neatly accomplished too.
>
> 2. The across dimension is a list of all the things about the
> individual product on one or other of Gloria's rows.

Except, we (and I assume Miguel) aren't doing anything like that!

Jeff
>
From: dorayme on 25 Apr 2010 18:35
In article <hr2f72$a04$1(a)news.albasani.net>,
Jeff Thies <jeff_thies(a)att.net> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:

> >
> > the two dimensions are doing real work:
> >

> Except, we (and I assume Miguel) aren't doing anything like that!
>

Not sure how you know this?

I have been a keen Miguel watcher (for the sole purpose of trying
to get him to cook me a Portuguese meal mind you <g>) for years
and his

"I am trying to display a list of products in a Grid with 3
columns and N rows."

in his original post tells enough about what he is doing to cast
some doubt on your claim that Miguel is not "doing anything like"
what I am talking about. I was talking about issues beyond the
actual business of Miguel and Portuguese food, mind you. <g>

--
dorayme
From: Jeff Thies on 25 Apr 2010 22:58
dorayme wrote:
> In article <hr2f72$a04$1(a)news.albasani.net>,
> Jeff Thies <jeff_thies(a)att.net> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>
>>> the two dimensions are doing real work:
>>>
>
>> Except, we (and I assume Miguel) aren't doing anything like that!
>>
>
> Not sure how you know this?

My take on this:

I am trying to display a list of *products* in a Grid with 3 columns and
N rows.

Each *product* has its Name, Image and in some cases a link to download
the brochure displayed as follows:

Image
Name
Brochure

All images have the same dimension. However some products might have
the brochure link or not.

(Note also his bit on 3 columns)

I'd have a different take if he did this:

Image Name Brochure

But he didn't.

What else could be in the rows but this?:


Image Image Image
Name Name Name
Brochure Brochure

with each product, which includes image, name and link in it's own cell.

Although I suppose you could have repeating alternating rows of images,
names and Brochures, but what sense would that make as tabular as there
is no fixed structure?

Doesn't really matter though...

Jeff
>
> I have been a keen Miguel watcher (for the sole purpose of trying
> to get him to cook me a Portuguese meal mind you <g>) for years
> and his
>
> "I am trying to display a list of products in a Grid with 3
> columns and N rows."
>
> in his original post tells enough about what he is doing to cast
> some doubt on your claim that Miguel is not "doing anything like"
> what I am talking about. I was talking about issues beyond the
> actual business of Miguel and Portuguese food, mind you. <g>
>
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Right and left padding with Opera
Next: One frame and many photos