Tables vs DIVs

[MRDix]

I looked at the capabilities of Dreamweaver and it says it does both tables and
divs, but it didn't say to my knowledge that it can actually convert an
existing page that uses tables to one that uses divs instead, so my question is
simply whether it can actually do that? And if it can, is it an easy process or
not?

Thanks,

[MRDix]

I looked at the capabilities of Dreamweaver and it says it does both tables and
divs, but it didn't say to my knowledge that it can actually convert an
existing page that uses tables to one that uses divs instead, so my question is
simply whether it can actually do that? And if it can, is it an easy process or
not?

Thanks,

[Murray *ACE*]

One would never want to use that capability. Why do you?

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
[url]http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com[/url] - Template Triage!
[url]http://www.projectseven.com/go[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
[url]http://www.dwfaq.com[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
[url]http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/[/url] - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================


"MRDix" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:eakm5m$qbj$1@forums.macromedia.com...

>I looked at the capabilities of Dreamweaver and it says it does both tables
>and
> divs, but it didn't say to my knowledge that it can actually convert an
> existing page that uses tables to one that uses divs instead, so my
> question is
> simply whether it can actually do that? And if it can, is it an easy
> process or
> not?
>
> Thanks,
>

[MRDix]

Sorry - Didn't make myself clear.

I have an existing site that uses tables to layout the page content.

I was wondering if it was possible to use DreamWeaver to convert my sites
table to Div's (Layers)?

Any help appreciated.

Regards,

MRD.

[Murray *ACE*]

Why do you want to do that? I mean, what is that going to do for you (other
than to make an unmanageable mess out of your code)?

Yes, you can do it. No, you don't want to do it from a "best practice"
point of view.

I am sensing that you area wanting layers so that you can shove things
around on the Design view screen - if you are determined to use layers,
please go here first -

[url]http://www.great-web-sights.com/g_layerlaws.asp[/url]

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
[url]http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com[/url] - Template Triage!
[url]http://www.projectseven.com/go[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
[url]http://www.dwfaq.com[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
[url]http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/[/url] - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================


"MRDix" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:eal0o5$9kb$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Sorry - Didn't make myself clear.
>
> I have an existing site that uses tables to layout the page content.
>
> I was wondering if it was possible to use DreamWeaver to convert my sites
> table to Div's (Layers)?
>
> Any help appreciated.
>
> Regards,
>
> MRD.
>
>

[MRDix]

Hi again,

The reason we're wanting to use DIVs instead of tables for layout is due to
the Disability Discrimination Act, that perhaps wouldn't make much sense if I
said that and nothing more, essentially though, we're writing an application
that screen readers will be run against for blind or partially sighted people,
and tables break up the reading of the text when we want it to flow. Obviously
for data, that's the best time to use tables, but for a layout perspective
purely, it gives us issues, hence why we want to move from the tables style of
layout to a DIV one. I understand that in moving from tables to DIVs is not the
easiest way of doing things, but we need to do so. So on that basis, hoping you
understand the explanation, is it possible that DreamWeaver can do so for us,
converting tables to DIVs or is it a case of starting afresh? The site was
already written prior to this coming out.

Thanks,

[Murray *ACE*]

That's a good reason.

How large is the site?

Converting a page from tables to layers does this

PAGE WITH A SIMPLE TABLE
<table width="600" border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1"
id="bodyTable">
<tr>
<td>cell 1x1</td>
<td id="thisOne">&nbsp;</td>
<td>cell 1x3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td class="special">cell 2x2</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>cell 3x1</td>
<td>cell 3x2</td>
<td>cell 3x3</td>
</tr>
</table>


PAGE CONVERTED TO LAYERS
<div id="Layer1" style="position: absolute; left: 14px; top: 17px; width:
194px; height: 23px; z-index: 1; vertical-align: middle">cell 1x1</div>
<div id="Layer2" style="position: absolute; left: 412px; top: 17px; width:
194px; height: 23px; z-index: 2; vertical-align: middle">cell 1x3</div>
<div id="Layer3" style="position: absolute; left: 213px; top: 41px; width:
194px; height: 23px; z-index: 3; vertical-align: middle">cell 2x2</div>
<div id="Layer4" style="position: absolute; left: 14px; top: 65px; width:
194px; height: 23px; z-index: 4; vertical-align: middle">cell 3x1</div>
<div id="Layer5" style="position: absolute; left: 213px; top: 65px; width:
194px; height: 23px; z-index: 5; vertical-align: middle">cell 3x2</div>
<div id="Layer6" style="position: absolute; left: 412px; top: 65px; width:
194px; height: 23px; z-index: 6; vertical-align: middle">cell 3x3</div>

Not only are the layers written INLINE, but they have lost any sense of
border, or cellpadding. Furthermore, any CSS you had assigned to the
original table (note the selectors - 'bodyTable' in the body tag, and
'special' and 'thisOne' in the <td> tags) are lost.

This means that if your tables coming in to the process have any CSS applied
to them by way of selectors, all of that CSS will be lost in the conversion.

If you have used spacer cells, each of those cells will also become a layer.
So for example, even a simple table with typical 1990's type layout
procedures applied to it, will generate a miasma of layers on the page that
will be simply impossible to maintain or troubleshoot, and that has no
chance of resembling your original page.

But the real killer is that you now wind up with all of your text content in
tiny layers adjacent to each other on the screen, and read as separate
entities by your screen reader. Furthermore, text in vertically adjacent
layers is the WORST possible situation - to see what happens when your
visitors simply enlarge this text in their browser window, go here -

[url]http://www.great-web-sights.com/g_layer-overlap.asp[/url]

The conclusion?

You would be MUCH better off rebuilding the entire site from scratch than
using CONVERT TABLES TO LAYERS - and, you will probably expend less than
half the effort.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
[url]http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com[/url] - Template Triage!
[url]http://www.projectseven.com/go[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
[url]http://www.dwfaq.com[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
[url]http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/[/url] - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================


"MRDix" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:ean4fh$19o$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Hi again,
>
> The reason we're wanting to use DIVs instead of tables for layout is due
> to
> the Disability Discrimination Act, that perhaps wouldn't make much sense
> if I
> said that and nothing more, essentially though, we're writing an
> application
> that screen readers will be run against for blind or partially sighted
> people,
> and tables break up the reading of the text when we want it to flow.
> Obviously
> for data, that's the best time to use tables, but for a layout perspective
> purely, it gives us issues, hence why we want to move from the tables
> style of
> layout to a DIV one. I understand that in moving from tables to DIVs is
> not the
> easiest way of doing things, but we need to do so. So on that basis,
> hoping you
> understand the explanation, is it possible that DreamWeaver can do so for
> us,
> converting tables to DIVs or is it a case of starting afresh? The site was
> already written prior to this coming out.
>
> Thanks,
>

[Murray *ACE*]

And by the way, I forgot to mention -

IF YOU HAVE NESTED TABLES, THE CONVERSION DOESN'T WORK. By that, I mean
that you cannot select the option - it's disabled.

I don't think this is a viable solution for you (or for anyone).

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
[url]http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com[/url] - Template Triage!
[url]http://www.projectseven.com/go[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
[url]http://www.dwfaq.com[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
[url]http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/[/url] - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================


"Murray *ACE*" <forums@HAHAgreat-web-sights.com> wrote in message
news:eanhg1$ftk$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> That's a good reason.
>
> How large is the site?
>
> Converting a page from tables to layers does this
>
> PAGE WITH A SIMPLE TABLE
> <table width="600" border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1"
> id="bodyTable">
> <tr>
> <td>cell 1x1</td>
> <td id="thisOne">&nbsp;</td>
> <td>cell 1x3</td>
> </tr>
> <tr>
> <td>&nbsp;</td>
> <td class="special">cell 2x2</td>
> <td>&nbsp;</td>
> </tr>
> <tr>
> <td>cell 3x1</td>
> <td>cell 3x2</td>
> <td>cell 3x3</td>
> </tr>
> </table>
>
>
> PAGE CONVERTED TO LAYERS
> <div id="Layer1" style="position: absolute; left: 14px; top: 17px; width:
> 194px; height: 23px; z-index: 1; vertical-align: middle">cell 1x1</div>
> <div id="Layer2" style="position: absolute; left: 412px; top: 17px; width:
> 194px; height: 23px; z-index: 2; vertical-align: middle">cell 1x3</div>
> <div id="Layer3" style="position: absolute; left: 213px; top: 41px; width:
> 194px; height: 23px; z-index: 3; vertical-align: middle">cell 2x2</div>
> <div id="Layer4" style="position: absolute; left: 14px; top: 65px; width:
> 194px; height: 23px; z-index: 4; vertical-align: middle">cell 3x1</div>
> <div id="Layer5" style="position: absolute; left: 213px; top: 65px; width:
> 194px; height: 23px; z-index: 5; vertical-align: middle">cell 3x2</div>
> <div id="Layer6" style="position: absolute; left: 412px; top: 65px; width:
> 194px; height: 23px; z-index: 6; vertical-align: middle">cell 3x3</div>
>
> Not only are the layers written INLINE, but they have lost any sense of
> border, or cellpadding. Furthermore, any CSS you had assigned to the
> original table (note the selectors - 'bodyTable' in the body tag, and
> 'special' and 'thisOne' in the <td> tags) are lost.
>
> This means that if your tables coming in to the process have any CSS
> applied to them by way of selectors, all of that CSS will be lost in the
> conversion.
>
> If you have used spacer cells, each of those cells will also become a
> layer. So for example, even a simple table with typical 1990's type layout
> procedures applied to it, will generate a miasma of layers on the page
> that will be simply impossible to maintain or troubleshoot, and that has
> no chance of resembling your original page.
>
> But the real killer is that you now wind up with all of your text content
> in tiny layers adjacent to each other on the screen, and read as separate
> entities by your screen reader. Furthermore, text in vertically adjacent
> layers is the WORST possible situation - to see what happens when your
> visitors simply enlarge this text in their browser window, go here -
>
> [url]http://www.great-web-sights.com/g_layer-overlap.asp[/url]
>
> The conclusion?
>
> You would be MUCH better off rebuilding the entire site from scratch than
> using CONVERT TABLES TO LAYERS - and, you will probably expend less than
> half the effort.
>
> --
> Murray --- ICQ 71997575
> Adobe Community Expert
> (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
> ==================
> [url]http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com[/url] - Template Triage!
> [url]http://www.projectseven.com/go[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
> [url]http://www.dwfaq.com[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
> [url]http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/[/url] - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
> ==================
>
>
> "MRDix" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
> news:ean4fh$19o$1@forums.macromedia.com...

>> Hi again,
>>
>> The reason we're wanting to use DIVs instead of tables for layout is due
>> to
>> the Disability Discrimination Act, that perhaps wouldn't make much sense
>> if I
>> said that and nothing more, essentially though, we're writing an
>> application
>> that screen readers will be run against for blind or partially sighted
>> people,
>> and tables break up the reading of the text when we want it to flow.
>> Obviously
>> for data, that's the best time to use tables, but for a layout
>> perspective
>> purely, it gives us issues, hence why we want to move from the tables
>> style of
>> layout to a DIV one. I understand that in moving from tables to DIVs is
>> not the
>> easiest way of doing things, but we need to do so. So on that basis,
>> hoping you
>> understand the explanation, is it possible that DreamWeaver can do so for
>> us,
>> converting tables to DIVs or is it a case of starting afresh? The site
>> was
>> already written prior to this coming out.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>

>
>