Forum Overview Display: Table vs Layers

[Badman3k]

Okay I think that this belongs here, as it's not really a problem with HTML and CSS, more of a general web building question, so I'm sorry if I'm in the wrong :D

I've recently been in an 'argument' with a fellow web designer while building the style for a phpBB forum. I personnally feel that the overview (page displaying the categories and forums, number of posts, last post details etc) was not tabular data and should therefore be displayed using divs and then styled in CSS. However he felt that it was in fact tabular data and should be displayed using tables.

I wanted to get everyone elses opinion on this matter, as I don't particularly like losing. :D

Looking forward to your thoughts :)

[brothercake]

You're both wrong :D

I personally feel that the overview (page displaying the categories and forums, number of posts, last post details etc) was not tabular data and should therefore be displayed using divs and then styled in CSS. However he felt that it was in fact tabular data and should be displayed using tables.

If a forum is not tabular data - does that mean it has no structure at all, apart from divisions? If you're not going to use tables, then don't just replace the cells with divs - think about what semantics might be more appropriate. Maybe it's a list .. maybe it's headings and paragraphs .. maybe it's both ... or neither ...

But more specifically - whether or not a forum is tabular data is arguable - this has come up a couple of times before, and we've basically concluded that a forum can be regarded as tabular data after all, but that a table is still not the best way to structure it (or similar cases). Have a look, see what you think -- http://www.codingforums.com/showthread.php?t=40373 and http://www.codingforums.com/showthread.php?t=51046

[Badman3k]

Thanks for the links Brothercake. I've read them both and would like to know more about the definition list solution.

You posted: <dl>
<dt>Views</dt>
<dd>347</dd>

<dt>Posts</dt>
<dd>17</dd>

<dt>Last post</dt>
<dd>Thu 10th June 2004 by somebody</dd>
</dl>

I've never used the definition list method before, but is it therefore possible to do the following:

<dl>

<dt>Thread</dt>
<dd>This is the first thread</dd>
<dd>This is another thread</dd>

<dt>Views</dt>
<dd>347</dd>
<dd>122</dd>

<dt>Posts</dt>
<dd>17</dd>
<dd>1</dd>

<dt>Last post</dt>
<dd>Thu 10th June 2004 by somebody</dd>
<dd>Wed 9th June 2004 by somebodyelse</dd>
</dl>

and thus just expand the definition list in the above way? Or does it then become a 2D matrix and therefore needs to be a table :)

Thanks again,

[brothercake]

Well, the DL in my example doesn't define the whole thread view, it only defines properties for a single thread. The wider context looks like basically this:

<div>
<h*>Thread title</h*>
<p>Summary description</p>

<dl>
...
</dl>
</div>

The point of that structure is that it's easier for serial browsers to use - they can scan through the topics using their "headings reading mode" or equivalent, and the properties of each thread (the DL) is presented in a direct key/value pairs relationship, thus directly associating (for example) the word "views" with the number "347", in the context of the previous heading, and thereby aiding comprehension.

If you follow your example, you're doing just the opposite - disassociating the data into groups, with no semantic relationship between those groups, other than their index in that group with respect to its sibling DT. Without some kind of definition-group element, it can't convey that information - we can only see it because we have intelligence, but parsers do not.

If you want to use a table, because you think it's right, use a table. But whatever you do use, think of what the element describes rather than the physical structure it creates, and structure your content to those semantics. Through that process you'll discover the best element to use, because it will be the one that most closely matches the inate flow of the data.

Phew! I wish you good luck - customising phpBB to spit out anywhere-near valid or semantic code is no slim challenge...


Oh, and don't think about how you're going to style it until you've got the structure right - it will mislead your thinking - just accept that it's going to be difficult ;)

[Badman3k]

Thanks again Brothercake, I'm going to do some thinking and see what/how I feel is the best way to display the forum.

:thumbsup:

[gsnedders]

Phew! I wish you good luck - customising phpBB to spit out anywhere-near valid or semantic code is no slim challenge...Making phpBB valid isn't hard - it's making it semantic which is hard (read: near impossible)...