CSS 3-column layout

Saw this link getting dugg today. Despite a huge CSS fan, I have to agree with one of the comments.

The fact that getting a 3 column layout in CSS is a feat of wonder is an indication that something is terribly wrong with the standard. Building this layout should be obvious, intuitive, and in no need of discussion. This is absolutely trivial with tables — the only difficulty being that CSS zealots are going to crucify you when you put it together 10x faster than they can.

I’m all for the semantic web, but the fact that people still can’t admit that CSS lacks a grid positioning system (allowing you to align content to other parts of the document tree) is why it still lacks such a system. Get off your high horse. Admit that CSS layout is inferior to tables in some cases and needs some revision, and maybe someday life will actually be easier.

Print article

This entry was posted by dodo on 04/08/2009 at 9:14 AM, and is filed under geeky. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Comments (9)

#1 written by Lissy
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

I like having the flexability to change my layout to however I want and not have to worry about going in and modifying the html. OK, so sometimes that’s not that easy either, but at least it’s possible. With tables, you can’t have users choose between multiple, drastically different layouts. A grid thing would be sweeeeeet!

I can’t go to the link b/c att is telling me they have dirty art. At least that’s what I’m guessing “EXART” means anyway.
#2 written by Nadiah Alwi
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

Hi, I found your blog because it seems like I am using a template that you designed. Just wanna say: thank you so much! Cheers!
#3 written by Edie
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

I love this layout it is very cute!
#4 written by Alberto
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

I strongly agree with you. Normally you can modify or re-write an entire theme ten times faster with the so deprecated tables then with css. There is really something wrong with the standards and the way they work.
#5 written by Margaret
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

I thought there are now CSS table structure???

Did I misunderstand??
#6 written by Bubs
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

I can make a non-fluid layout using CSS almost as fast as using tables. However, I do miss the days of tables and width=”100%” height=”100%” :P
#7 written by Jenny
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

I’ve always found 3 cols to be kinda…annoying. But I can put them together pretty quick. It’s getting them to work in everything that’s the pain.
#8 written by Krystal
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

Tables are soo much eaiser when trying to structure things, but CSS is like the “better” method according to professional developers. I find it hard to create more than two columns using CSS and takes so much of my time which could be done in about 5 mins using tables.

Maybe sometime in the future CSS will develop to include structures or an effectiveness positioning system.
#9 written by Ben
about 1 year ago

Reply Quote

I agree wholeheartedly. Personally, I won’t hesitate to use tables if it’s going to save me time and if the user wouldn’t notice the difference anyways. Otherwise, I stick to CSS as much as I can.