An update on 2.0

[Killer Possum]

SMF is STILL using tables for layout in SMF2???  

As far as I know, that's being worked on.

Not only that, but who really cares? Most of the forum users out there (if you count ALL forums out there) don't even know what a table is much less anything about HTML at all. It all looks the same in the end.

I understand that we are all CSS junkies here because we all work on websites ourselves, but in the end if it didn't make it into SMF 2.0 it wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) be a back breaking flaw IMO.

Unless tables suddenly do not validate under XHTML 1.0 (which is the standard SMF uses) then it shouldn't be a concern.

[Peter Duggan]

Not only that, but who really cares?

I really care!

Validation alone is not good enough, semantics are important for a variety of reasons and superfluous layout tables are a nightmare when it comes to customization. But, like Aäron said, it's being worked on.

[Killer Possum]

I understand that you can do more when not using tables, but honestly what more does one do to a forum that you can't do with tables? If you look at other forums that have switched they really haven't done anything that screams 'this forum isn't using tables look how fancy'.

Maybe it's just because I haven't seen the new SMF theme that's being "worked on" but I can tell you that if it looks the same as the current default theme then I don't see the point. But again, that's only my opinion and to be clear I'm not saying it's usless to switch just saying that there isn't a point unless you have the wow factor and show something really nice that can't be done with tables.

[Peter Duggan]

It's not just about what it looks like or what you can do with it, it's about how it works!

semantics are important for a variety of reasons and superfluous layout tables are a nightmare when it comes to customization.

[motumbo]

Not only that, but who really cares? Most of the forum users out there (if you count ALL forums out there) don't even know what a table is much less anything about HTML at all. It all looks the same in the end.

Anybody who has to create their own custom theme is going to care.

Divs = easy to modify
Tables =  major pain-in-the-butt.

It's 2007, not 1996.  Divs and CSS is the proper way to do layout.  There is no arguing that.

I understand that we are all CSS junkies here because we all work on websites ourselves, but in the end if it didn't make it into SMF 2.0 it wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) be a back breaking flaw IMO.

I would consider it a major flaw.  Especially in this day in age.  It ain't 1996 anymore, folks.

Unless tables suddenly do not validate under XHTML 1.0 (which is the standard SMF uses) then it shouldn't be a concern.

Is there not anyone who knows how to do layout with Divs working on the development team.  EVERYTHING--even development--is easier to do with Divs than with tables.  Everything.

Go to any web development forum and tell them that you still use tables for layout and you are going to be seriously laughed at.  I'd rather walk around in plaid bellbottoms, platform shoes, and an orange leather jacket than use tables for layout.  Seriously, I'd be embarassed as a web developer to use tables for layout.

I really care!

Validation alone is not good enough, semantics are important for a variety of reasons and superfluous layout tables are a nightmare when it comes to customization. But, like Aäron said, it's being worked on.

When I was learning web development 3 years ago or so everywhere I looked I saw "don't use tables for layout, don't use tables for layout".  Why SMF has to be years behind the curve, I don't know.

Even phpBB--probably the chief competitor to SMF--is moving to Divs and CSS.  There is no way SMF is going to be able to compete if they stick with tables.

I've seen criticism elsewhere about SMF having sloppy code.  Using Divs for presentation would go a long way toward rectifying that.

Again, we are not in 1996 anymore. There is no good reason to use tables for layout.  There is not a single valid argument other than "we'd rather spend the time working on superfluous features than get with the times and use Divs".

Using tables for layout is like buying a new car with an 8-track cassette player instead of a CD/MP3 player.  It's ancient history.

I understand that you can do more when not using tables, but honestly what more does one do to a forum that you can't do with tables? If you look at other forums that have switched they really haven't done anything that screams 'this forum isn't using tables look how fancy'.

Maybe it's just because I haven't seen the new SMF theme that's being "worked on" but I can tell you that if it looks the same as the current default theme then I don't see the point. But again, that's only my opinion and to be clear I'm not saying it's usless to switch just saying that there isn't a point unless you have the wow factor and show something really nice that can't be done with tables.

I don't mean to be rude, but I think there is something that you just aren't getting.

1) Divs/CSS is the proper way to do layout.  Does any more really need to be said beyond that?

2) Divs/CSS make customizing the theme significantly easier.  Check out the Wordpress themes and see how easy they are to modify because they don't use tables for layout.  Look how hard SMF is to modify because it uses tables AND has presentation buried in the Source files.

3) Divs/CSS make the development process easier, more efficient, and simplifies and unclutters the code.  How can the developers of SMF claim that tables make development easier?

4) It really would not take long to develop a CSS/Div default theme IF the presentational code wasn't so buried in the Source files.  (If this wasn't the case, I'd just make my own Div/CSS theme and make it available to others.  A Div-based theme would be wildly popular.)

Also, I'm not particularly wild about the current default SMF theme.  Making the SMF 2.0 theme look like the 1.x theme shouldn't be a priority.  Even still, that is a moot point when you think of how easy it is to customize a theme when using Divs.

The only possible explanation I can think of is that someone learned web development in 1996 and never bothered to update their skillset.

[Peter Duggan]

1) Divs/CSS is the proper way to do layout.  Does any more really need to be said beyond that?

Yes! Divs are just one type of element that can be styled with CSS and, while still an obvious building block for layouts, often unnecessarily used ('divitis').

[motumbo]

It's not just about what it looks like or what you can do with it, it's about how it works!

[Unknown]?

Why such resistance to using Divs when it would be relatively easy to do?

SMF would work better, be easier to develop, be easier to debug, and be easier to customize if the presentation were separated from the logic and Divs/CSS were used for presentation.

I've made enough webpages to know the benefits of Divs/CSS. 

http://webdesign.about.com/od/layout/a/aa111102a.htm

Web Page Layouts Shouldn't Use Tables

Read the above for a quick overview of why tables should not be used for layout.

[Peter Duggan]

It's not just about what it looks like or what you can do with it, it's about how it works!

[Unknown]?

Eh?

[motumbo]

1) Divs/CSS is the proper way to do layout.  Does any more really need to be said beyond that?

Yes! Divs are just one type of element that can be styled with CSS and, while still an obvious building block for layouts, often unnecessarily used ('divitis').

I think I've had "divitis" before.  I've had "tableitis", too, when I had to customize my SMF theme.  Symptoms are frequent bursts of anger, a pounding headache, the inability to get anything to work the way you want it to, and the urge to pick up your monitor and smash it to the floor. 

I hope I never get "tableitis" again. 

[Killer Possum]

lol, wow motumbo you read way too much into what I said and have jumped to way too many conclusions so after the first few sentences I just stopped reading.

I'm talking about a forum template here and NOT design in general. I've seen many amazing tableless designs that are really good and I myself have made tabeless designs as well. And even still that was just my opinion. I understand that it would be easier to modify a template that doesn't use tables but honestly what are you going to do to a forum template that you can't do with the current tabled design? Which, has so few tables in it anyways!

It was not my intention to argue so I will just say this and them I'm done. If you are not going to break out of the box with a design, then why try to cut the tape? (if you will).

Again, just so you get it, I'm talking about a forum template here and not web design in general.

[Peter Duggan]

I think I've had "divitis" before.  I've had "tableitis", too, when I had to customize my SMF theme.

I'm not arguing divs v. tables (I'm with you on layout tables), but saying that divs are often used in CSS layouts when they're neither desirable nor necessary. If you need a div, use a div, but don't wrap everything in divs just because you think you're supposed to (and, no, this isn't directed at you personally, it's more of a general comment)!

[Peter Duggan]

I understand that it would be easier to modify a template that doesn't use tables but honestly what are you going to do to a forum template that you can't do with the current tabled design?

1. Modify it without doing your head in (but you seem to have acknowledged that).
2. Make sense of it in a non-graphical browser.

[Killer Possum]

2. Make sense of it in a non-graphical browser.

Ah, finally, someone points out to me the purpose of this for a forum (other than it makes things easier, because that I understand). Thank you Peter. I try to keep up with the times but my current job has nothing to do with web design (or websites at all) so I'm a little rusty.

I didn't think of that but it makes sense and so I was actually going to ask you what you meant when you said "it's about how it works!" but saw that you had already answered.

[Rudolf]

FYI, I converted the display template of the default theme (the one use the most in absolute) into a tableless layout in less then one hour. It was 90% like the original, and with a little more work it could have been 99%. It was an experiment from my part because I just couldn't understand why it takes so long to convert the theme.
I hope SMF 2 will feature way less tables then 1.1. There's no excuse to don't convert it.

[SleePy]

Rudolf,
Did you test that on all common browsers?

IE{5,6,7}, Firefox {1,1.5,2.0}, Safari {1.3,2.0,3.0}, Opera {8,9} just to name a few
It can go on but the deal is getting every browser to display it right

[Smith6612]

Don't forget about hand helds... I'm on my PSP right now and the top of this forum is a bit screwed up...

[Rudolf]

I tested in Firefox2 and IE6. As I said it was an experiment, and I did it in less then one hour. In a one days work you could easily do a template that works 90% the same in all the browsers. That's a pretty good match.
Now count the templates that are in the default theme. 56 templates, but most of them are very similar.
This thing is really old, it's been years that people say to move towards semantic layout.

[Joshua Dickerson]

I take it as a flaw too.

[radj]

split the "divs vs tables" topic out of this one.

anyhoo.

cant wait for SMF twooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. especially for this feature: http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=175812.

[Peter Duggan]

split the "divs vs tables" topic out of this one.

Why? It's relevant!

cant wait for SMF twooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

I CANT WAIT!

Of course you can. Everybody can. And not just where SMF is concerned, because we all *have* to wait for things that are not available or happening now!