Grid. Best approach ...
in [CSS]
|
From: dorayme on 25 Apr 2010 23:56 In article <hr2vhr$vre$1(a)news.albasani.net>, Jeff Thies <jeff_thies(a)att.net> wrote: > 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. Why must these all be in their own cells? What do you know about Miguel that I don't? And if Miguel is not the issue, then why would you not do what I said Gloria did? And if you wanted it the other way around why not what Cynthia (see earlier post of mine in this thread) did. And what Cynthia did was tabular and data for a table and what is wrong with that? And why does Cynthia's table not have meaningful rows and columns just because the height and width are transposed regarding the display of the content? The meaning of the rows in the one table is a list, a display of the properties of each good for sale. Reading across you get the properties of ech item, reading down you get the different items for sale. In Cynthia's rendering, it is basically the other way around. > > 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? > There is a definite structure and that is why a table is the best thing for this. We must not confuse Miguel's vague descriptions and silly things his boss is insisting on with a lack of a sensible structure for a sensible way of dealing with the html/css issue. If we are not talking html/css best practice, let's talk what should be done to Miguel's boss. Let us be utterly frank about it... how about giving him a choice to be eaten by shark or sat on by bull elephant? <g> -- dorayme |