<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CSS vs. Nested Tables</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/</link>
	<description>presented by Site Potion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:24:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: diseño web</title>
		<link>http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/comment-page-1/#comment-70014</link>
		<dc:creator>diseño web</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:11:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/#comment-70014</guid>
		<description>The one that continues using tables is because it does not dominate or does not know CSS. To design in CSS is far better, by the subject of order, maintenance, accessibility, navigability and thousand reasons more.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The one that continues using tables is because it does not dominate or does not know CSS. To design in CSS is far better, by the subject of order, maintenance, accessibility, navigability and thousand reasons more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clay</title>
		<link>http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/comment-page-1/#comment-36696</link>
		<dc:creator>Clay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:58:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/#comment-36696</guid>
		<description>@Peter: that&#039;s a great point.  Search engines are very sophisticated.  Everyday I uses Google and end up finding pages that use nested tables for their layout.  The content of the page is good, so it makes it into the index.  Since writing this post a year and a half ago, I think I&#039;ve finally come up with way to treat SEO that works for me.  Anything we can do as designers to make it easy on the search engines is great, but ultimately they are going to create algorithms that place pages with good, useful content at the top of their results regardless of the mark up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Peter: that&#8217;s a great point.  Search engines are very sophisticated.  Everyday I uses Google and end up finding pages that use nested tables for their layout.  The content of the page is good, so it makes it into the index.  Since writing this post a year and a half ago, I think I&#8217;ve finally come up with way to treat SEO that works for me.  Anything we can do as designers to make it easy on the search engines is great, but ultimately they are going to create algorithms that place pages with good, useful content at the top of their results regardless of the mark up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/comment-page-1/#comment-36695</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/#comment-36695</guid>
		<description>That is the most coherent nonreligious article about css-p I have ever read.
I am pro css, but I am not a css freak, if my client wants a site which has only 5 pages and actually wants to maintain it him/herself. Tables+ some css is the way to go. I am not in the habit of wasting my time or my clients money. Most search engines don&#039;t really care about table tags, they simply ignore them, and relevancy is calculated through statistics, not by how far the search word is from the top of the document or weather or not it it is enclosed in an  tag. The smarter search engines ignore tags altogether. In the future, the search engines are only going to get smarter, to countermeasure those who try to climb to the top with clever design, but irrelevant content. Although I will be the first to admit that css+divs is the wave of the future, and div positioning and graceful degradation are a beautiful thing. Sometimes they are just not worth it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That is the most coherent nonreligious article about css-p I have ever read.<br />
I am pro css, but I am not a css freak, if my client wants a site which has only 5 pages and actually wants to maintain it him/herself. Tables+ some css is the way to go. I am not in the habit of wasting my time or my clients money. Most search engines don&#8217;t really care about table tags, they simply ignore them, and relevancy is calculated through statistics, not by how far the search word is from the top of the document or weather or not it it is enclosed in an  tag. The smarter search engines ignore tags altogether. In the future, the search engines are only going to get smarter, to countermeasure those who try to climb to the top with clever design, but irrelevant content. Although I will be the first to admit that css+divs is the wave of the future, and div positioning and graceful degradation are a beautiful thing. Sometimes they are just not worth it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clay</title>
		<link>http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/comment-page-1/#comment-36694</link>
		<dc:creator>Clay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:27:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/#comment-36694</guid>
		<description>Ha!  Joe, I could&#039;ve saved a lot of time writing this post if I&#039;d just consulted you first.  Much more succinct.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ha!  Joe, I could&#8217;ve saved a lot of time writing this post if I&#8217;d just consulted you first.  Much more succinct.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/comment-page-1/#comment-36693</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 02:35:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indywebshop.com/bestpractices/2006/06/14/css-vs-nested-tables/#comment-36693</guid>
		<description>Tables are easier to use but the size reduction with css makes a big difference.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tables are easier to use but the size reduction with css makes a big difference.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

