Neverside

Google doesn't read your meta's, it looks at your code, google is the first engine that doesn't look at metas... It does look, like freak said at what's inside your h# tags.

And to Popo: I don't preach the use of semantics, I only give some of its benefits, and show some semantic mistakes concerning divs. What you do with it is up to you, this is just a help for those concerned with semantics...

burrito: You have my permission. Everyone needs to ask btw, I don't want this to end up on every blog in the universe

Last edited by Gil, December 4th, 2004 11:53 PM (Edited 1 times)

I say go with what's easier for you.. the BEST reason I know of to use all DIVs and no tables (layout wise.. within the layout is a different story) is for multiple layouts with the same code, using a CSS switcher. I used to have that at my site, but now I just use it for alternate colors.. plus I never have time to work on my site. So I used tables to throw up a quick layout.. and I don't touch my site much.. I will when I time (maybe)

___________________

please not that discussion here MinDFreeZ, wether or not you use a table-layout is a totally different discussion...

Quote:

Originally posted by burrito
like one big image for all your content? how would that be dynamic?

Actually that's a pretty cool idea. Not practical, but interesting to try out. You could generate your image with PHP using GD, and accept user input by recording the coordinates of a click.

Quote:

Originally posted by nano
Actually that's a pretty cool idea. Not practical, but interesting to try out. You could generate your image with PHP using GD, and accept user input by recording the coordinates of a click.

http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dynatext/

Wouldn't know how to do the user input though... Not a bad idea now that you think about it, 'coz it now means you can use any font you wish... But then there's the problem of it being annoying/crap/unreadable ... And that's to do with site usability... I'm not getting into one of those discussions on here lol :P

___________________

400MB space | 5GB bandwidth | free domain name | PHP/MySQL | $4.95/mo

OMG WHATS THIS?!?!?!?!?

Basically, if you want something like that, go flash...

Or fiddle with image maps, be it CSS image maps or the traditional ones (check ala - night of the image maps). But try thinking about the loading time and the process time needed by the php. It would be a nice experiment though, but I reckon it would be hard to respect semantics...

Semantics ARE important especially if your site is to be used by different clients. If you use a <B> tag and your site is accessed by somebody is blind how do you do bold text in speech ? The answer is you dont. Which is why you use <strong>. Then it is up to a visual client to display the text in bold and maybe a aural client to say the text differently.

___________________

Why do we have to learn English? I speaks da *****

Quote:

Originally posted by eu4ria
Semantics ARE important especially if your site is to be used by different clients. If you use a <B> tag and your site is accessed by somebody is blind how do you do bold text in speech ? The answer is you dont. Which is why you use <strong>. Then it is up to a visual client to display the text in bold and maybe a aural client to say the text differently.

I think that's possibly the clearest explanation, and probably one of the best reasons to use semantics. Though, there are enough people who simply don't care about that, or crawlers or any other benefits.

Jewels: We're not preaching semantics here. It's all still a little early for that. We can only show the benefits and let people judge for themselves... If they don't care it's their bussiness...

Eu4ria: you are right indeed, anyone who wants to be fairly professional should agree to that point and take impaired people in consideration...

I don't feel like explaining my opinions right now, so I'll just summerize them. Here's what I think:

- Semantic are VERY important
- Meta tags are important for search engines that read them
- All sites should use CSS and follow XHTML 1.1 Standard rather than just XHTML 1.0. (I'm dreaming, but oh well)
- Tables are good for organizing data, but should not be used for layouts, and should be coded properly according to the XHTML 1.1 specs.
- Arguing about this is pointless.

Yes, contrary to some people's beliefs, XHTML 1.1 does allow tables. It's just very strict.

___________________

I don't suffer from insanity; I enjoy every minute of it.
Unintended Theory | Cacrew v4