Is there any real difference between CSS based web pages and table based ones?

[cybernut]

Having recently developed various websites using a responsive web editor, my conclusion is that CSS'd web pages aren't that much different from older table based ones, at least where devices with larger displays are concerned, e.g desktops/towers, laptops, larger tablet systems.

[A.Jenery]

Table based web pages wouldn't be responsive, although I'm sure you took that into consideration...

[ATH019]

Table based web pages wouldn't be responsive, although I'm sure you took that into consideration...

The o.p cybernut did qualify with 'at least where devices with larger displays are concerned, e.g ...'  Depending on the CSS formatting, I tend to agree that there might not be much difference visually between how a table based page looks and how a CSSd one does.


Global Moderator

[blag-it Admin]

This is a difficult one to call.  Where larger screens or displays are concerned it really makes little difference if web pages are responsive or not, so leaving that factor aside I also tend to agree with the topic starter.  A css file or inline style can dictate say a three column x five row page, and you can achieve the same thing with a table.


Admin

[McGaskil]

I think you can achieve more formatting options with css, unless you have nested tables or something like you could have with table bsed pages.

[cybernut]

Table based web pages wouldn't be responsive, although I'm sure you took that into consideration...

That's the only area where css is better imho, but for larger screened devices I honestly can't tell the difference visully.

[cybernut]

Table based web pages wouldn't be responsive, although I'm sure you took that into consideration...

The o.p cybernut did qualify with 'at least where devices with larger displays are concerned, e.g ...'  Depending on the CSS formatting, I tend to agree that there might not be much difference visually between how a table based page looks and how a CSSd one does.


Global Moderator

Thanks   That's exactly why I made that qualifier.

[cybernut]

I think you can achieve more formatting options with css, unless you have nested tables or something like you could have with table bsed pages.

Well I remember like it was yesterday, having say a table within a cell of a table that was itself in the main table using an early incarnation of Dreamweaver.  There was little formatting options you couldn't do with this technique.

[McGaskil]

I think you can achieve more formatting options with css, unless you have nested tables or something like you could have with table bsed pages.

Well I remember like it was yesterday, having say a table within a cell of a table that was itself in the main table using an early incarnation of Dreamweaver.  There was little formatting options you couldn't do with this technique.

Yeah there's some truth to this, but then you'll also remember that having nested tables resulted in terrible, over bloated html code.  Using CSS or inline styles reduces all of that and makes a html page easier to read/follow.

[cybernut]

I think you can achieve more formatting options with css, unless you have nested tables or something like you could have with table bsed pages.

Well I remember like it was yesterday, having say a table within a cell of a table that was itself in the main table using an early incarnation of Dreamweaver.  There was little formatting options you couldn't do with this technique.

Yeah there's some truth to this, but then you'll also remember that having nested tables resulted in terrible, over bloated html code.  Using CSS or inline styles reduces all of that and makes a html page easier to read/follow.

Ok I can accept that, but the point I'm making is, that whenever I look at some of my home pages, they don't look CSSd even though they are - they look just like table-based pages of yesteryear.