The caption attribute isn’t valid on the table element. it fails W3 validation for XHTML Transitional/Strict. Everything else is great though

Cheers,
Nick

But I have learned the proper CSS, semantic methods, in recent years.

I work in construction, etc, for a living, and computers, programming and web authoring are all sidelines.

By the time a person has to make a really serious commitment to a topic (ie, can’t do anything else) in order to participate or practice it, it becomes less interesting to me.

In fact, I like to do a lot of different things, don’t want to be restricted to one or a few of them … and I like to work in avenues that tend to strengthen that outlook.

After doing table-presentation in the early years (and adding some CSS to make it more maintainable) I was confronted by the ‘tables are wrong’ campaign. I could see the argument (non-semantic), but I had difficulty with the CSS.

I also saw that folks who were web-authoring-naive, could fairly easily pick up table-presentation, while CSS presentation did not lend itself nearly so well to usage by ‘lightweights’.

As time has passed, CSS has matured and standardized far less quickly & well, than other web paradigms. Pushing a decade now, and it’s still messy, on top of being more challenging that table-presentation.

As my abilities have gradually improved, and I’ve come to understand the ’semantic web’ better & more-clearly, I’ve gradually realized that it *should* be possible to do a good deal of perfectly semantic work, within tables.

In your post here, you are talking about making *tabular* content semantic. That is different from the semantic issues of typical narrative content, etc, tho, it seems to me, hardly prohibitive of the later.

Do you know of any degree of acceptance of the idea of using tables for presentation, while honoring the laudable semantic goals?

Thanks! Ted