httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com>
Subject Re: tables
Date Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:02:08 GMT
On Sat, 10 Nov 2001, Joshua Slive wrote:

> Just something to throw out to the sharks.
>
> There seems to be an unwritten rule that <table>s are banned from the httpd
> docs.  I guess this is not surprising since some of the docs were written
> back in a time where table support in browsers could not be counted on.  The
> result is some ugly monstrosities like the listing of % directives in
> mod_log_config.html.
>
> I suggest we do away with this rule and use <table>s where appropriate.  (I
> just committed one to mod_headers.html.)  There are still people using
> browsers like lynx that do not handle tables, but if we use tables
> intelligently, those people should still be able to use the docs.
>
> Any opinions?

mod_rewrite uses tables extensively, and I have not heard any
complaints. (I have some *other* complaints about the mod_rewrite docs,
but I don't have time for that right now.)

Lynx handles tables just fine, and w3m, another console browser, handles
them perfectly, and is gaining popularity. In fact, it's what I use
almost exclusively.

Tables have been in HTML for a heck of a long time, and I don't see any
particular reason to eschew them any longer. I would vote for using them
where appropriate, but not going overboard and using them where they are
not really necessary. And we hope that most of us have the good sense to
be able to tell the difference.

-- 
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
http://geeks.cre8tivegroup.com/  --- Work
http://www.rcbowen.com/ --- Play


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org


Mime
View raw message