[meuk]

Dunno, but it wouldn't surprise me. The resemblence between tables and flexboxes is also quite funny. We took 20 years from declaring the structure of table-like markup in a table to declaring it in CSS with a flexbox.

Cool, but things like this have a marginal positive effect for developers, at the cost of having to learn yet another thing, and making it harder and harder to make a reasonable webpage.

[RobLach]

Wait till you take a look at CSS grid

https://css-tricks.com/snippets/css/complete-guide-grid/

[expertentipp]

Basically a table but instead of HTML elements, using CSS properties? I loathe how "let's move the concept from one separation layer into another one, or better yet - let's mix the concepts together in the same separation layer" is becoming the next big thing recently.

[exogen]

CSS Grid does the opposite of what you claim – it fixes the mixing of concepts that previously tied HTML elements to their layout, not make it worse.

[expertentipp]

table, td, tr, etc are perfectly valid and semantic HTML elements. Are HTML5's footer and header elements broken as well, shall we expect "footer-" and "header-" CSS properties in 5 years?

[exogen]

I have no idea why you keep bringing up <table>. It is totally unlike CSS Grid and completely unrelated in every way.

CSS Grid is for layout, not tabular data. It allows you to move the presentation of your elements around at different breakpoints regardless of your markup structure.

In general I recommend understanding a feature before you spout off nonsense about it.

[meuk]

> I have no idea why you keep bringing up <table>. It is totally unlike CSS Grid and completely unrelated in every way.

I disagree. Conceptually, it is exactly how you would do layout in the old days. This still works, btw, it's just considered bad practice.

It's a bit like saying that a kitchen knife is totally unlike a dagger and completely unrelated in every way, because the former is for slicing food and the latter for stabbing.