Why aren't we supposed to use <table> in a design?

Question

What are some clear and logical reasons for why we shouldn't be designing websites with tables? Where are the benefits, what has been driving this idea in the industry? When is it okay to use a table?

Solution 1

1) Tables shouldn't be used for page layouts because they are:

• Slow to render as the browser needs to download most - if not all - of the table to render it properly

• They require more HTML than non-table layouts which means slower loading and rendering, as well as an increased bandwidth usage

• They can be a nightmare to maintain as they can quickly get complex

• They can break text copying

• They negatively affect screen readers and may make your content inaccessible to some users

• They are not as flexible as using proper semantic markup

• They were never intended to be used for page layouts

• Making tables into a responsive layout is very difficult to control

2) Use a table for tabular data. That's what tables are for.

See also: Why are people making tables with divs?

Solution 2

Tables are for tabular data, not design. People often misunderstand the motivation behind making pages "tableless".

It is wrong to use tables to create your layout. You should use other elements for layout (divs, lists, sections, articles, headers, footers, asides, etc.). And you can achieve great effects with minimal HTML/CSS (leaving your code semantically meaningful, lightweight, and easy to maintain).

Of course, tabular data should be inside a table element. If you want, you can improve even the tables' semantics by adding thead, tfoot, tbody, th, caption etc. All those elements are intended to be used with tables, and believe me, they can make your table much more self-descriptive.

So, thing is, don't go with table-based design and use any HTML/CSS solution that fits. Start from HTML semantic markup, and then build up design with CSS. This should keep anyone safe. Use this as a rule of thumb.

Solution 3

Tables should only be used when displaying tabular data. Otherwise, they are usually a poor choice for display.

Solution 4

Tables are supposed to contain data, and not design elements.

View more solutions

Comments

[Admin]

Extensively discussed on SO stackoverflow.com/questions/83073/…

[Admin]

Google uses tables themselves, within adwords for example. With millions of advertisers logging and working with dynamic data it's much easier to code around a <table> then a CSS grid. I use datatables.net for a few applications and you can see a list of who uses that jquery plugin on their site. Lots of sites still use tables for good reasons. I only use tables though when working with a lot of dynamic data that needs to be sorted by column paginated etc, but not for page layouts that's what CSS is for.

[Incognito]

Right, so if I have a section on contact details that is OK to have a table for, but the graphical layout of a page is in DIVs or something likewise to them. I've seen some designers avoid them all-together in areas that have tabular data and use DIVs.

[John Conde]

Designers who avoid tables altogether don't know what they're doing. They've misunderstood what "don't use tables for page layouts" means.

[t3mujin]

Totlly agree, specially when people insist to implement inner tables or too many rowspan/colspan cells...

[Trufa]

Excellent answer sir! The answer is clear, usa a <table> when you need a table.

[Django Reinhardt]

Thank god someone wrote a clear answer... Oh to go back to the days of tables *shudders*

[Lèse majesté]

It's stupid to avoid tables altogether, but there are legitimate alternatives to tables for contact info. A definition list is a good alternative, particularly when implementing an hCard: cagintranet.com/archive/…

[Stephan Muller]

A definition list is NOT good for a contact card. A definition list is a definition list. Is 'Lèse majesté' the definiton of your name? Nope.

[Lèse majesté]

@Litso: You should read the W3C's own specs on DL before you decide what it's good for or not good for.

[Såm]

Spot on John! I will never understand why and how I managed to use TABLEs as layout during 1996 ~ 2006... and now that I use DIV instead its an entire different (better) experience altogether! Wish I had read your answer back in 1996 :)

[Evan Plaice]

There is also a position:table CSS tag for creating table-based layouts without putting them in HTML. There are a few niche cases where tables are still the best/easiest option for layouts. Take a look @ css-tricks.com/fluid-width-equal-height-columns to see what I mean.

[Forrest]

@JohnConde See here: webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/53695/…

[Parthian Shot]

In case anyone's still paying attention to this, contact info should go in <address> tags now. Because HTML5 == awesome.sauce .

[Parthian Shot]

@Kzqai Well... Any contact info for the author so long as it's name and internet contact info and not a postal address.

[Kzqai]

@ParthianShot Actually, <address> should only contain article author contact info or site owner contact info, but postal addresses matching those descriptions are actually fine. html5doctor.com/the-address-element (just take note that neither html5doctor.com nor the spec write the rules very understandably about using postal addresses)

[Parthian Shot]

@Kzqai Ah... whoops. For correcting me, you get a +1. And, since the spec is short enough to just quote here for posterity, here it is: The address element provides contact information for a document or part of a document. Information provided by address may include the names of the document’s maintainers, links to the maintainers’ Web pages, e-mail addresses for feedback, postal addresses, phone numbers, and so on. The address element is not appropriate for all postal and e-mail addresses; it should be reserved for providing such information about the contact people for the document.

[I Capulet]

And in terms of SEO, Google loves tables when it contains tabular data. Hell, they have an initiative for treating tables as datasets: blog.google/outreach-initiatives/google-news-initiative/… .