Difference between revisions of "Talk:Styles Wishlist"
From Dreamwidth Notes
Jadelennox (Talk | contribs) (table-based layouts) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''As few table-based layouts as possible''. Do we need '''any''' table-based layouts? Their benefits are overwhelmingly beaten by their negatives, especially from an accessibility perspective. [[User:Jadelennox|Jadelennox]] 20:22, 7 February 2009 (UTC) | ''As few table-based layouts as possible''. Do we need '''any''' table-based layouts? Their benefits are overwhelmingly beaten by their negatives, especially from an accessibility perspective. [[User:Jadelennox|Jadelennox]] 20:22, 7 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Ideally we want none, but since we're inheriting a lot of historical table-based layouts, the styles team is prioritizing how they update them. --[[User:Rahaeli|Rahaeli]] 17:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | My goals do not include any table-based layouts, although many will have table-based calendars. However, eventually we'd like to convert the non-LJ table based layouts to CSS-based. [[User:Aveleh|Aveleh]] 18:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 18:17, 9 February 2009
As few table-based layouts as possible. Do we need any table-based layouts? Their benefits are overwhelmingly beaten by their negatives, especially from an accessibility perspective. Jadelennox 20:22, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Ideally we want none, but since we're inheriting a lot of historical table-based layouts, the styles team is prioritizing how they update them. --Rahaeli 17:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
My goals do not include any table-based layouts, although many will have table-based calendars. However, eventually we'd like to convert the non-LJ table based layouts to CSS-based. Aveleh 18:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
