A bit of a narrow minded vision, don't you think? Can you indicate what M you are referring to that we should R?
While I agree that it is generally better to use tables for tabular presentation and other CSS for design constructs, I don't agree with the "Tables are not for layout" statement. I also don't agree this site (and millions of others) do(es) it wrong. In the past few years, it gathered 52313 members that have made 153483 posts. How wrong is that? Sounds successful to me....
In my opinion, you're better off using CSS to design a site, and use tables for tabular data. However, there is no right or wrong. Instead of showing your (possibly??) limited vision and experience with this by telling people to R The F M, you should tell them *why* it's important to use CSS instead of tables. Tell them about reusability, cost of site wide changes, general maintainability, improved tools support and so on.
Also, tell them that table are perfectly acceptable in some cases, as long as you don't overuse them. IMO, there is not something wrong with using one simple table if it means you have instant cross browser compatibility, without spending literally days or weeks to tweak a "perfect" CSS design.
IMO, that is a lot closer to the truth than "Tables are not for layout" and RTFM are....
Everyone is unique, except for me.
Author of ASP.NET 2.0 Instant Results
and Beginning Dreamweaver MX / MX 2004
While typing this post, I was listening to: Day Of The Lords
by Joy Division
(Track 4 from the album: Heart And Soul (CD 1)
) What's This?