On 2 May 2003, at 16:36, rudy wrote:

> > > i completely share your frustration at learning the
> > > new method
> >
> > Wrong assumption. I am not frustrated at "learning the
> > new method" (since I am not doing that).
> 
> well, if you're not learning css,

You're right, I'm not learning CSS. I'm using it. ;-)

> then you should not make preposterous and egregiously
> uninformed statements like calling the css committee
> "idiotic" 

Yes, I can still call them "idiotic". It is not 
preposterous. Many highly intelligent people in the 
technical field cannot see beyond the technology 
details. The insistance on not using tables for layout 
purposes, to me, is an example of that.

> and now that you've had your say, you should really make
> way for people who do want to discuss how to achieve
> certain results with css instead of blowing off steam
> about how inappropriate css is

Wasn't blowing off steam re inappropriate CSS. Just 
pointed out that CSS isn't quite there yet, and IMHO 
this is partly due to the CSS standards committee and 
some of its decisions. You can certainly use tables as 
layout devices and use CSS at the same time. Going 
"table-less" certainly doesn't have to be a requirement 
for "good CSS."

David
dvjones(at)ksbe.edu
 

• Web Designer Courses
• Off the Shelf Training Courses

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA