(j0nah.com)

549 points thecr0w | 5 comments | 07 Dec 25 17:18 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source

1. handedness ◴[08 Dec 25 04:35 UTC] No.46188347[source]▶

A site in '96 would have been built largely with tables, not CSS. CSS didn't become a thing until a couple of years later.

I know this because I'm still salty about the transition. For all of CSS's advantages, we lost something when we largely moved away from tables.

2. chrisco255 ◴[08 Dec 25 04:43 UTC] No.46188426[source]▶

We lost something for a time but flex box and CSS grid (which came more recently) are objectively better than tables.

replies(1): >>46189985 #

3. yesitcan ◴[08 Dec 25 04:43 UTC] No.46188429[source]▶

You can still use tables.

replies(1): >>46196618 #

How are they objectively better? They seem way too complex for me

5. handedness ◴[08 Dec 25 19:37 UTC] No.46196618[source]▶

Of course, as implied by, "we largely moved away from tables."

I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude