Benefits of Div + CSS

From blogger: I have been thinking about why previous programmers are so persistent in table instead of Div + CSS in Web development, since I was engaged in web development, I have always insisted on taking the DIV + CSS route and advocated separating Oo and view actions on JS. However, IT companies have no choice but to keep development speed at the top, I recently saw this article discussing the benefits of Div + CSS, which is really relevant. I will share it with you later.

 

Article Source: http://www.awflasher.com/blog/archives/583

 

[Original]

 

Although the company is very busy at present, it is still necessary to discuss the problem of Div + CSS. Because it is no longer the new term two years ago. It is gradually entering the field of view of traditional Web developers and designers. Its advantages and disadvantages have gradually become the focus of debate among front-end engineers.

 

Today, I happened to see "a comrade who has nearly two years of development experience and history in Div + CSS, and used to be an absolute fan of web standards" in his blog, and published a statement to abandon Div + CSS. I feel a deep sorrow, especially when I tried to persuade the company's front-end developers to start learning Div + CSS.

 

But looking at two of the reasons why this "good comrade" gave up, it made me feel cold.

• Company leaders and customers don't care about this. What they need is fast, efficient work and fancy pages.
• The effort is not proportional to the income. Using table can greatly reduce the workload.

Indeed, in today's market environment, div + CSS is a luxury for a financial company. Especially for companies that rely on sales staff to run their businesses and survive (do not plan to go public), it is a great waste. I have seen 90% of the companies that build websites in three days in Guangzhou, then, 10% of Web developers pushed messy HTML code snippets to the table again.

Even so, a company's identity and investment in Div + CSS directly determines the company's desired goals, such as listing. Fortunately, my current company is very willing to pay for this.

 

In fact, in the implementation of specific commercial products, it is not necessary to stick to the role of "absolute fans of web standards. It seems that we should calmly think about why Div + CSS is used, rather than how to implement some details.

 

Our company is facing the opposite dilemma. It is too restrictive to Div + CSS and Div + CSS for div + CSS. This is meaningless. If a technology is forcibly used to achieve an effect, it is a very failed approach. Of course, I think this requires the joint efforts and concessions of the designers and developers. Especially in B/S architecture. Designers must make more concessions. For example, the 1px gap in a layout can save 3 k html file size, even if the visual 1px effect is abandoned, I think it is worth it. What's more, most designs that interfere with the layout of Div + CSS are also extremely bad.

 

I think a lot about movivi.com Seo. I think the biggest problem is that we don't have enough knowledge of W3C.

At that time, when W3C was just launched, the three major portals were very disdainful. Clear tables are all over the home page. However, the problems caused by this will soon be exposed. Search engine crawlers are difficult to parse complex tables, and style revisions are also extremely uncomfortable.

Div + CSS: In this layout, div carries the content, while CSS carries the style. The separation of content and style has a great impact on the WYSIWYG traditional table editing method. In particular, it is difficult for designers to design a style they cannot see immediately. However, the benefits of Div + CSS are too obvious:

 

1,Search engine affinity: Search engines do not care about the design or composition of a page. It is impossible for a search engine to "enjoy" the design of beautiful and novel pages, nor to "exclude" the color with ugly pages. They just leave without knowing what they need. If a page contains a large number of tables to describe the architecture, how much will it take for a search engine to get really useful information?
Based on my own experience, in general, the size ratio of the style structure and content information of the page described by the table architecture may reach or higher. While the CSS + Div architecture page, although it seems that downloading a complex CSS on the client also occupies almost the same bandwidth, the search engine can easily bypass this CSS, instead, directly capture the content in the div. This is the advantage of Div. The bandwidth is slightly occupied, which is totally insignificant. What's more, a redundant table design architecture will occupy more bandwidth if the code is poorly written.

 

2,Convenient page Reconstruction.
The most typical example of this application is the various blog programs. For example, my LBS system and popular pjblog and WP and MT under PHP all adopt the DIV + CSS architecture. The separation of content and style leads us to redefine the specific position and style of each Div element when restructuring the page layout (replacing the skin. It is too troublesome to modify the original table to change almost all content injection channels.

With regard to the difficulty of using Div to describe Korean-style websites, I personally think that South Korea's fancy genre will soon be replaced by the simple school under the impact of the army. If it is really a good design, I personally think it is better to use flash!

 

Http://awards.cssmania.com/2006/07/07/css-world-awards-winners-2006.php
2006The annual CSS World Competition won the prize. Let's see what is the perfect art under W3C! Look at people's PR!